#■ 

V  v  w 

m„ 


x      WW 


iVv      - 


-VV^:,^V 


tim 


Vw  v^ 


& 


Miscellaneous  TcAm 


Vol  .  2.1. 


- 

*■ 


vTWM    ID)  3S  A  ©  ©  Kf 


AN  INQUIRY  INTO 


THE  NATURE,  DUTIES,  AND  EXERCISE 


OF    THE 


©sfsfssji  @w  wmim  wm&.@@ws 


CHRISTIAN      CHURCH. 


JAMES  M.  WILLSON,  A.M., 

PASTOR  OF  THE  REFORMED  PRESBYTERIAN  CONGREGATION,  PHILA. 


"  Let  the  Deacons  be  grave,  &x." — 1  Tim.  iii.  8. 
1  Let  all  things  be  done  decently,  and  in  order." — 1  Cor.  xiv.  40. 


PHILADELPHIA: 
WILLIAM    S.    YOUNG,    173    RACE    STREET. 

1841. 


t 


Wm.  S.  Young,  Frinttr. 


INTRODUCTION 


This  Essay  has  for  its  object  the  illustration  of  a  part 
of  the  Order  of  the  Church  of  God,  which  has,  in  modern 
times,  been  remarkably  overlooked.     The  office  of  the 
deacon  is  not,  it  is  true,  so  important  as  either  that  of  the 
pastor  or  the  ruling-elder,  yet  it  is  not  without  its  import- 
ance as  a  distinct  part  of  the  Building  of  God.    The  care  of 
the  church's  poor,  and  the  wise  and  faithful  administration 
of  the  contributions  of  the  saints  for  the  promotion  of 
Christ's  cause,  are  matters  that  cannot,  without  injury  to 
the  church,  be  forgotten  or  neglected :  and  it  is  worth  our 
serious  inquiry,  whether  the  manifest  deficiency  in  the  first 
of  these,  and  the  almost  insuperable  difficulties  that  often 
beset  the  church  in  regard  to  the  last,  may  not  be  in  part 
owing  to  the  want  of  the  deaconship  as  an  actively  exe- 
cuted function  in  the  churches.     For  two  other  reasons, 
however,  this  subject  should  engage  the  most  careful  and 
solemn  attention  of  the  members  of  the  Christian  church. 
1st.  If  the  deacon's  office  be",  as  it  is  generally  admitted 
to  be,  a  divinely  instituted  office,  can  the  churches  be 
guiltless  in  the  neglect  of  it?     And,  2dly,  most  of  the 
churches  explicitly  recognise  this  office  in  their  standards 
as  of  divine  right,  but  how  few  have  such  an  officer  as 
the  deacon!     It  should,  at  least,  awaken  the  attention  of 
Christians  to  the  subject,  when  they  look  into  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  find  the  deacon  often  mentioned  there — when 
they  look  into  the  standards  of  their  churches,  and  find 
the  deacon  recognised  there,  but  when  they  look  round 
upon  their  congregations  they  can  find  no  deacons,  or 
very  few,  there.     That  we  may  know  Christ's  will  as 
King  in  Zion,  and  pay  our  own  vows,  we  ought  to  ex- 


(     4     ) 

amine  this  subject  honestly  and  prayerfully;  and  not 
only  examine  but  act,  by  restoring  this  office  to  its  origi- 
nal and  proper  position  in  the  Christian  Church. 

Such  an  examination  has  been  attempted  in  the  follow- 
ing  Essay.  The  general,  and  yet  not,  concerted  action, 
in  reference  to  the  deacon's  office,  which  has  taken  place 
and  is  now  croing  on,  in  many  churches  in  Scotland  and 
Ireland,  and  in  the  United  States,  seems  to  indicate  a 
providential  movement,  and  to  invite  such  an  examination. 
Let  not  the  reader  reject  at  once  propositions  that  may  be 
new  to  him.     Weigh  the  evidence. 

Much  obscurity  may  be  expected  to  prevail  upon  a 
subject  that  has  occupied  so  little  attention  for  some  gene- 
rations, until  a  very  late  period.  The  writer  is,  in  some 
respects,  a  pioneer  on  this  subject.  Dr.  Miller,  of 
Princeton,  has,  indeed,  discussed  the  office  of  the  deacon 
in  his  Essay  upon  the  Ruling-Elder,  with  his  usual  accu- 
racy and  research.  It  will  be  found,  however,  that  this 
Essay  embraces  a  larger  field,  and  one  which  has  for 
some  time  past  been  little  cultivated.  Owing  to  this  cir- 
cumstance, there  may  be  some  inaccuracies  which  might 
otherwise  have  been  avoided;  and  that,  notwithstanding 
much  care  has  been  taken  to  avoid  the  mis-stating  either 
of  facts  or  principles.  Let  the  attention  of  the  churches 
be  directed  to  the  subject  in  a  proper  spirit,  and  with  an 
humble  dependence  upon  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  for  teaching 
and  direction,  and  then  mistakes  will  in  due  time  be  rec- 
tified— errors  removed,  and  the  truth  not  only  discovered, 
but  reduced  to  practice.  To  furnish  some  assistance  in 
bringing  about  these  results,  is  the  object  of  the  following 
Essay. 

Philadelphia. 


THE   DEACON. 


CHAPTER  I. 

The  Deacon's  Office  is  ordinary  and  perpetual  in  the  Christian 

Church. 

Deacons  were  ordained  in  the  apostolic  churches  soon 
after  the  day  of  Pentecost.  Of  the  election  and  ordination 
of  seven  deacons  in  the  church  at  Jerusalem,  we  have  the 
history  in  Acts  vi.  1 — 6.  When  the  epistle  to  the  Phi- 
lippians  was  written,  there  was  a  class  of  officers  in  the 
churches  in  Philippi,  distinct  from  Bishops,  and  called 
deacons:  for  this  epistle  is  addressed  "to  the  saints,  with 
the  bishops  and  deacons."  They  are  mentioned  in  1  Tim. 
iii.  8,  12,  13,  as  standing  officers  of  the  church.  This 
epistle  contains  directions  for  the  right  ordering  of  the 
house  of  God.  Among  the  things  to  be  set  in  order  are 
the  "bishops"  and  the  "deacons:"  ver.  8,  "Likewise  must 
the  deacons  he  grave"  The  manner  in  which  the  deacons 
are  referred  to  here,  in  a  letter  of  instructions  to  an  evan- 
gelist, whose  duty  it  was  to  set  in  order  in  the  churches 
the  things  that  were  wanting,  is  almost,  if  not  altogether, 
equivalent  to  a  command  to  all  congregations  to  choose 
them  and  have  them  ordained.  They  must  have  been  a 
known  and  established  class  of  ecclesiastical  officers  at 
that  time;  as  much  so  as  "bishops;"  for  they  are  men- 
tioned exactly  in  the  same  way.  There  are  plain  allu- 
sions to  this  office,  as  an  established  function  in  the  church, 
in  other  epistles.  In  Rom.  xii.  6,  7,  Paul  exhorts  the  dea- 
con, with  the  other  ecclesiastical  officers:  "having,  then, 
gifts  differing  according  to  the  grace  that  is  given  to  us, 
whether  prophecy,  let  us  prophesy  according  to  the  pro- 
portion of  faith :  or  ministry,  (Siaxonar,  the  deaconship)  let  us 
wait  on  our  ministering,  (««<  t-n  ScaXOVI.a,  on  the  deaconship.) 
Besides,  the  duties  of  the  deacon  are  unequivocally  re- 
ferred to,  in  the  eighth  verse,  in  the  expressions,  "  giving," 
and,  "showing  mercy."*     There  can  be  no  reasonable 

*  Henry,  "ministry" — the  office  of  a  deacon.     Scott,   "  if  a  man 
were  called  to  the  office  of  a  deacon."     Guyse,  "  or  if  any  of  us  be  called 

2 


(      6      ) 

doubt,  that,  at  this  time,  there  was  in  the  Roman  church, 
as  at  Philippi,  a  board  of  deacons,  whose  official  business 
it  was,  to  distribute  of  the  church's  stock  to  the  necessities 
of  the  poor,  and  for  other  demands. 

The  same  apostle,  in  1  Cor.  xii.  28,  enumerates  dea- 
cons, with  the  other  officers  "set  in  the  church,"  under 
the  denomination  of  "helps,"  for  they  were  originally  in- 
stituted, as  we  learn  from  the  account  of  the  choice  of  the 
first  deacons,  in  Acts  vi.,  to  be  helps,  or  assistants  to  the 
apostles  in  the  work  of  distributing  the  church's  stock.* 
The  deacon's  office  is  mentioned  by  the  apostle  Peter,  as 
established,  and  exercised  in  the  churches  of  Asia  Minor: 
I  Pet.  iv.  10,  11,  "as  every  man  hath  received  the  gift, 
(aasio.ua,  the  office, f)  even  so  minister  the  same  to  one  ano- 
ther, as  good  stewards  of  the  manifold  grace  of  God.  If  any 
man  speak,  let  him  speak  as  the  oracles  of  God;  if  any 
man  minister,  (fiiaxo^t,  exercises  the  deacon's  office,)  let  him 
do  it  as  of  the  ability  which  God  giveth  (*°sw«  furnish- 
eth")  The  last  clause  fixes  the  meaning  of  the  word, 
"  minister,"  and  shows  that  it  is  used  in  a  restricted  sense, 
that  it  is  the  deacon  who  is  exhorted  to  liberality  to  the 
lull  extent  of  the  supply  furnished  him  in  the  providence 
of  God.l  The  Christians  immediately  addressed  in  this 
letter  were  dispersed  throughout  a  large  district  of  country 
on  the  west  of  Asia.  The  deacon  must  have  been  known 
as  a  church  officer  throughout  that  region. 

to  the  office  of  deacons."  Calvin,  "  he  that  giveth,"  "  deacons  mho  pre- 
side in  distributing  the  public  property  of  the  church."  Hodge,  "  those 
wlio  were  called  to  the  office  of  deacons."  Rutherford,  "  the  distributor 
is  the  deacon  also."  Bcza,  "  the  bodily  ministrations  of  the  church." 
London  Divines,  Paisley  Ed.  1799,  p.  105,  "  he  that  giveth,  that  is,  the 
deacon,"  p.  140,  "  so  they  are  distinguished  from  all  ordinary  officers, 
reckoned  up,  Rom.  xii.  7,  8."  Renwick's  work  quoted  in  the  next  note, 
p.  541,  "  him  that  showeth  mercy,  by  whom  is  meant  the  deacon." 

■  Henry,  "helps:  or  such  as  had  compassion  on  the  sick  and  weak, 
and  ministered  to  them."  Scott,  "or,  as  some  explain  it,  to  help  the 
pastors  in  the  office  of  deacons."  London  Divines,  same  Ed.  p.  116, 
"  helps,  there  is  the  deacon;"  p.  140,  "deacons  in  the  church  are  an  or- 
dinance  of  Jesus  Christ.  For,  1.  They  are  found  in  Christ's  catalogue 
of  church  officers,  distinct  from  all  other  officers,  both  extraordinary  and 
ordinary,  helps,  1  Cor.  xii.  28."  James  Renwick's  Admission  of  Elders, 
p.  502,  of  collection  of  sermons,  Glasgow,  1776,  "  helps,  that  is,  the 
deacons."  The  same  interpretation  is  given  of  this  passage,  by  Beza, 
Piscator,  Dickson,  Hammond,  and  many  other  critics. 

t  As  in  1  Tim.  iv.  14,  and  2  Tim.  i.  6. 

X  Scott,  "  and  if  any  man  acted  as  a  deacon."  Henry,  "  cither  as  a 
deacon  distributing  the  alms  of  the  church."  Grotius,  "the  duty  of 
deacons"     So  Piscator  and  Calvin. 


(  7  ) 

In  all  the  passages  quoted,  the  word  "5ia*ovo$"  is  used  as  a 
designation  of  office.  It  is  not,  however,  always  thus  em- 
ployed; it  sometimes  signifies  one  who  "serves"  in  any 
employment,  or  performs  any  "act  of  ministration."  As 
in  2  Cor.  iii.  6,  Paul  styles  himself  and  Apollos,  "ftMwwwf." 
And  in  Rom.  xv.  8,  our  Saviour  himself  is  said  to  be  "the 
minister  (Siaxovov)  of  the  circumcision."  In  this  respect, 
Snxxovoj,  corresponds  with  other  words  designating  office- 
bearers. Anas-tow  signifies  "a  messenger;"  and  is  so  used, 
Phil.  ii.  25,  where  Epaphroditus  is  called  "your  messen- 
ger, vpav  a.*oisto%ov"  Yet  the  "  apostles"  were  extraordinary 
ecclesiastical  officers,  n^taftvtt^ot  means  "one  elder  in  years;" 
and  is  used  in  that  sense,  1  Tim.  v.  1.  But  it  is  also  an 
official  designation.  When  Paul  addresses  "the  deacons" 
at  Philippi,  there  is  no  difficulty  in  distinguishing  the 
specific  sense  of  the  word  " Siaxown,?."  It  is  equally  plain, 
that  in  1  Tim.  iii.,  "  the  deacon  "  is  an  officer  of  the  church, 
distinct  from  the  bishop  or  presbyter.  When  he  that  minis- 
tereth,  is  mentioned  in  Rom.  xii.,  and  1  Pet.  iv.,  as  one 
who  performs  duties  entirely  different  in  their  character 
from  those  of  the  exhorter,  and  the  speaker,  and  these 
duties  are  "giving,"  and  "showing  mercy,"  we  at  once 
discover  a  distinct  office — the  diakonate.  In  a  word,  a 
process  of  reasoning  precisely  similar  to  that  which  would 
resolve  the  deacon's  office  into  a  service  of  any  kind,  would 
strip  the  church  of  all  her  officers,  ordinary  and  extraor- 
dinary.* 

Some,  admitting  the  deacon's  office  to  be  distinct  from 
that  of  the  pastor  and  ruling  elder,  have  supposed  it,  how- 
ever, to  be,  after  all,  a  mere  expedient ;  that  it  is  left  to  the 
will  of  the  church  to  determine  whether  there  shall  be 
deacons  ordained  or  not.  It  is  supposed  that  the  fact  of 
the  circumstances  which  gave  rise  to  the  appointment  of 
"the  seven,"  being  mentioned  in  the  narrative  of  that  event, 
(Acts  vi.  1 — 6,)  warrants  such  an  inference. 

It  might  be  argued,  as  plausibly,  that  the  Jewish  San- 
hedrim was  not  a  permanent  institution,  because  it  origi- 
nated in  the  wilderness,  by  the  advice  of  Jethro,  and  was 
established  for  the  purpose  of  relieving  Moses  from  a  bur- 
den too  heavy  for  him.  Or  that  the  organization  of  the 
Christian  Church,  by  a  regular  gradation  of  courts  from 
the  session  to  the  General  Synod  (or  Assembly,)  and  the 
bringing  up  of  appeals  from  the  lower  to  the  higher,  are 

*  It  would  go  farther,  and  abolish  the  presidents,  judges,  &c,  of  the 
state;  the  generals  of  the  army;  and  most  other  officers,  for  their  titles 
have  a  general  and  common,  as  well  as  a  specific  and  technical  meaning. 


(     8     ) 

indifferent,  or  to  be  determined  by  circumstances,  because 
the  Synod  at  Jerusalem  was  held  twenty  years  after  the 
day  of  Pentecost,  and  was  then  held  for  a  special  business. 
The  objection  omits  entirely  some  very  important  conside- 
rations. 1.  We  must  "distinguish  between  an  occasion, 
and  a  motive  and  cause."*  The  occasion  of  instituting 
the  Sanhedrim  was  the  pressure  of  judicial  business  upon 
Moses:  the  motive  was  the  establishment  of  such  a  system 
as  might  always  secure  due  attention  to  legislative  and  ju- 
dicial business.  Israel  was  not  to  wait  until  a  recurrence 
of  similar  circumstances  before  electing  their  rulers :  by 
electing  them  agreeably  to  God's  appointment,  they  were 
prepared  for  business  beforehand.  2.  We  are  to  receive 
from  the  Scriptures  the  order  of  the  church  in  its  com- 
pleted form.  Otherwise,  the  church  might  always  be  said 
to  be  in  an  inchoate  or  forming  state.  Ruling  elders  might 
be  dropped  for  the  very  reason  which  is  involved  in  the 
objection,  because  some  time  must  have  elapsed  before 
their  ordination  after  the  day  of  Pentecost :  even  the  pas- 
toral office,  for  the  same  reason !  The  apostles  were  com- 
missioned to  erect  the  fabric  of  the  church  in  her  New 
Testament  form.  Are  we  at  liberty  to  say,  "  this  fabric 
was  at  a  certain  period  incomplete;  an  uncommon  concur- 
rence of  circumstances  gave  rise  to  a  part  of  her  form, 
therefore,  this  is  not  called  for  in  any  other  circumstances?" 
Is  not  the  perfect  fabric,  on  the  contrary,  the  model  to 
which  the  church's  structure  should  be  conformed?  More- 
over, it  is  probable  that  a  very  short  time  elapsed  previ- 
ously to  the  ordination  of  deacons :  perhaps  not  a  month. 
3.  In  the  other  passages  where  the  deacon  is  mentioned, 
there  is  no  intimation  of  any  such  principle  applicable  to 
the  deacon's  office.  It  is  referred  to  as  a  standing  and 
permanent  office.  And  4.  The  objection  comes  to  us  lia- 
ble to  great  suspicion,  for  it  is  brought  forward  by  those 
who  have  neglected  to  ordain  this  scriptural  officer,  as  an 
apology  for  this  neglect.  And,  finally,  the  assumption 
that  there  is  not  a  call  for  this  office  under  ordinary  cir- 
cumstances, is  entirely  unfounded.  For  these  reasons  we 
do  not  admit  the  objection  as  having  any  force.  And  in 
this  we  follow  the  example  of  the  church  of  God  in  all  her 
purest  and  best  times. 

The  epistles  in  which  the  notices  of  the  deacon's  office 
which  have  been  referred  to,  occur,  were  sent  to  parts  of 
the  church  very  distant  from  each  other;  indeed,  it  may 
be  truly  said,  to  all  the  apostolic  churches.     Rome,  on  the 

*  Due  Kight  of  Presbyteries,  by  Samuel  Rutherford,  p.  100. 


(     9     ) 

far  west — the  Asiatic  churches,  addressed  by  Peter,  on  tHe 
east,  and  the  Grecian  churches  lying  between  them.  In 
all  these,  the  deacon  was  a  recognised  and  existing  officer 
in  the  times  of  the  apostles  themselves,  and  by  their  di- 
rection.* 

With  regard  to  the  existence  of  deacons  as  distinct  offi- 
cers in  the  church,  from  the  apostolic  age  onward,  there  is. 
and  can  be,  no  doubt,  Mosheim  says,f  that  "  all  the  other 
christian  churches  followed  the  example  of  that  of  Jerusalem,  ■ 
in  whatever  related  to  the  choice  and  office  of  the  deacons." 
In  the  apostolical  canons,  J  the  deacon  is  constantly  mention- 
ed in  connexion  with  bishops  and  elders.  These  canons  are 
not,  it  is  true,  as  their  title  would  intimate,  the  production 
of  the  apostles,  but  they  do,  nevertheless,  establish  with 
great  certainty  the  order  existing  in  the  church  during 
the  2d  and  3d  centuries;,  or  perhaps  a  little  later.  The 
epistles  of  Ignatius,§>  who  lived  at  the  close  of  the  first  cen- 
tury, and  the  beginning  of  the  second,  are  enough,  even 
if  we  had  no"  other  evidence,  to  establish  the  fact  of  the 
presence,  universally,  of  deacons  in  the  churches  before 
the  death  of  the  last  of  the  apostles.  He  says  to  the  Mag- 
nesians,  "I  exhort  you  that  you  study  to  do  all  things  in  a 
divine  concord — and  your  deacons,  most  dear  to  me,  being 
intrusted  with  the  ministry  of  Jesus  Christ."  Again,  to  the 
Trallians;  "Let  all  reverence  the  deacons"  Again,  to  the 
Philadelphians;  "which  also  I  salute,  &c—  especially  if 
they  are  at  unity  with  the  bishop  and  elders,  who  are 
with  him,  and  the  deacons  appointed  according  to  the  mind 
of  Jesus  Christ"  Again,  "one  bishop,  together  with  his 
eldership,  and  the  deacons,  my  fellow-servants."  Again. 
"I  speak  with  a  loud  voice;  attend  to  the  bishop,  to  the 
eldership,  and  to  the  deacons."  Again,  to  the  Smyr- 
neans;  "and  reverence  the  deacons  as  the  command  of 
God."  Again,  "I  salute  your  very  worthy  bishop;  and 
your  venerable  eldership;  and  yoxir  deacons,  my  fellow-ser- 

*  Dr.  Owen,  the  distinguished  English  divine,  remarks  in  the  ix, 
chapter  of  his  Treatise  on  Church  Government,  that  "  deacons  were  not 
only  in  the  church  at  Jerusalem,  but  in  all  the  churches  of  the  Gentiles." 

t  Ecclesiastical  History,  Cent.  I.  chapter  2,  §  10. 

t  These  canons,  although  not  composed  by  the  apostles,  nor  even  in 
their  times,  are  unquestionably  the  production  of  a  very  early  aore.  A 
few  quotations  will  confirm  the  statement  in  the  text.  Canon  27th, 
"  Episcopum,  vel  Presbyterum,  vel  diaconum  verberantem  fideles  peccan- 
tes,  &c."  Can.  42d,  "  Episcopus,  aut  Presbyter,  aut  diaconus,  alea 
vacuus,  &c."  Can.  44th  "  Episcopus,  aut  Presbyter,  aut  diaconus  usuras 
exigens,  &c." 

§  Ignatius  was  martyred  during  the  reign  of  Trajan;  of  course,  before 
A.  D.  1 17. 

2* 


(    io    ) 

vants"  And,  finally,  in  his  epistle  to  Polycarp;*  "My 
soul  be  security  for  them  who  submit  to  their  bishop,f  with 
their  elders  and  deacons."  Origen,|  who  lived  in  the  be- 
ginning of  the  third  century,  a  little  more  than  one  hun- 
dred years  after  the  death  of  the  apostle  John,  speaks 
of  deacons  as  officers  then  in  the  church.  "  The  deacons,'1 
says  he,  "preside  over  the  money  tables  of  the  church"  Cy- 
prian, the  distinguished  bishop  of  Carthage,  who  was  mar- 
tyred in  the  year  259,  directs  his  29th  epistle  "to  my  breth- 
ren, the  elders  and  deacons."  Epiphanius,  a  writer  of  the 
fourth  century,  says,  "originally  all  offices  of  the  church 
were  performed  by  bishops,  presbyters,  and  deacons,  and, 
therefore,  no  church  was  without  a  deacon." 

These  citations  bring  us  to  the  Nicene  period.  They 
furnish  ample  evidence  that  from  the  earliest  periods  the 
church  had  deacons,  to  assist  the  pastors  and  eldership 
in  the  right  ordering  of  ecclesiastical  affairs.  Indeed,  to 
those  who  are  at  all  familiar  with  the  history  of  the  first 
three  centuries  of  the  Christian  era,  even  these  brief  state- 
ments on  the  subject  may  have  seemed  unnecessary. 
The  deacon  is  mentioned  by  all  the  early  writers  who 
have  occasion  to  refer  to  the  organization  of  the  church,  as 
freely,  and  almost  as  frequently  as  the  pastor,  or  the  ruling 
elder.  Any  one  who  has  read  the  letters  and  commen- 
taries of  the  fathers,  (as  they  are  called,)  knows  this  to  be 
so.     Let  us  come  down  to  a  later  period. 

The  witnesses,  who  continued  to  keep  the  truth,  and 
testified  for  it  in  the  valleys  of  Savoy  and  Piedmont,  while 
the  corruptions  of  popery  and  the  delusions  of  Mahom- 
medanism  were  quenching  its  light  over  the  whole  of  the 
old  Roman  Empire,  had  their  congregations  organized 
with  deacons.  Their  Confession  of  Faith,  inserted  in  the 
"addition"  to  the  history  of  the  Waldenses  by  M.  Gillis, 
one  of  their  pastors,  makes  the  following  declaration  on 
this  subject;  "It  is  necessary  for  the  church  to  have  pas- 
tors, to  preach  God's  word,  to  administer  sacraments,  and 
to  watch  over  the  sheep  of  Jesus  Christ;  and  also  elders 
and  deacons,  according  to  the  rules  of  good  and  holy  church 
discipline,  and  the  practice  of  the  primitive  church."  This 
confession  is  said  by  the  historian  to  have  been  the  con- 

*   Martyred  in  the  reign  of  .Marcus  Antoninus,  Trajan's  successor. 

t  The  reader  should  understand  that  these  early  writers  did  not  use 
the  word  "bishop"  in  the  sense  of  "diocesan  hishop,"  they  meant  the 
bishop  of  a  congregation.     Sec  Mo.sheim,  1st  Century. 

\  One  of  the  most  intelligent  of  all  the  early  writers,  though  in  many 
things  unsound.      He  died  about  the  middle  oi*  Century  III. 


(  11  ) 

fession  of  the  ancient  Waldensian  church,  and  still  re- 
ceived.* 

The  Reformers  in  the  16th  century,  both  upon  the  con- 
tinent and  in  the  British  Isles,  who  organized  their  churches 
upon  Presbyterian  principles,  all  had  deacons  in  their 
congregations ;  they  all  held  the  doctrine  that  the  deacon's 
office  is  ordinary  and  perpetual :  and  here  the  only  labour 
is  to  select  from  the  mass  of  testimony  presented,  that 
which  is  most  brief  and  forcible.  Let  us  begin  with  Ge- 
neva and  Calvin.  In  his  24th  sermon,  on  the  1st  Epistle 
to  Timothy,  Calvin  says,  "and  it  is  certain  that  God  will 
have  this  rule  to  be  observed  and  kept  in  his  church ;  that 
is  to  say,  that  the  poor  be  cared  for;  and  not  only  that 
every  private  man,  &c,  but  that  there  be  a  public  office, 
and  men  appointed  to  have  care  of  them  that  are  in  neces- 
sity, that  things  may  be  ordered  as  they  ought."  What 
follows  is  expressed  in  strong  language,  and  shows  what 
this  eminent  divine  thought  of  the  omission  to  ordain  dea- 
cons. "  And,  if  it  be  not  so,  it  is  certain,  that  we  cannot 
brag  that  we  have  a  well  ordered  church,  and  after  the  doc- 
trine of  the  gospel,  but  a  confused  thing  and  a  hotch-potch." 

Francis  Junius,  who  was  Professor  of  Theology  in  the 
church  of  Holland  in  the  beginning  of  the  reformation, 
maintains  in  his  "Ecclesiastics,"  that  "pastors,  elders,  and 
deacons,  are  the  only  three  scriptural  orders  of  church  of- 
ficers;" that  "these  three  orders  are  set  forth  in  scripture, 
and  existed  in  the  primitive  church."  Pareus,  a  German 
reformer  of  great  eminence,  who  lived  at  the  same  time, 
in  his  commentary  on  Romans  xii.  8,  explains  the  "giving," 
and  "showing  mercy,"  as  " standing  ecclesiastical  deacon- 
ships,"  or  functions  of  the  deacon's  office.  Jerome  Zan- 
chius,  an  Italian  divine  of  the  16th  century,  and  a  very 
distinguished  reformer,  says,  "The  whole  ministry  of  the 
Christian  church  may  be  divided  into  three  classes. — The 
third  is  of  those  to  whom  is  committed  the  care  of  the 
poor,  &c,  who  were  called  deacons,  Acts  vi.,  Romans  xii., 
1st  Timothy  iii."f 

The  sentiments  of  these  very  distinguished  continental 
divines,  were  in  strict  accordance  with  the  doctrines  on 
the  subject  of  the  deacon's  office,  imbodied  in  the  stan- 
dards of  nearly  all  the  reformed  churches  upon  the  con- 
tinent. The  Geneva  book  of  common  order,  chapter  hi., 
says,  "The  deacons  must  be  men  of  good  estimation,  &c." 

*  This  statement  is  taken  from  "  Miller  on  the  Ruling  Elder,"  p.  109. 
tZanchii  Opera,  Vol.  iv.  4th  praecept,  p.  727. 


(     12     ) 

This  book  of  common  order  contains  the  rules  of  disci- 
pline adopted  by  the  Scottish  congregation  of  Geneva,  and 
agrees,  in  all  important  particulars,  with  the  discipline  of 
the  churches  of  Geneva.  The  French  church  was  very 
explicit.  Confession  of  Faith,  Art.  xxix.:  "we  believe  that 
this  true  church  ought  to  be  governed  by  that  discipline 
which  our  Lord  Jesus  hath  established;  so  that  there 
should  be  in  the  church  pastors,  elders,  and  deacons."*  That 
the  French  churches  had  deacons  in  all  their  congrega- 
tions is  a  fact  so  notorious  as  to  require  no  proof.  They 
went  farther,  however,  and  required  of  noblemen  "to  con- 
stitute in  their  families  a  consistory,  composed  of  the  min- 
ister, and  of  the  best  approved  persons  for  godliness  in 
their  said  family,  who  shall  be  chosen  elders  and  deacons."  \ 
The  principles  of  Knox  and  his  co-labourers,  and  succes- 
sors in  the  work  of  reformation  in  Scotland  in  reference  to 
the  deacon,  are  most  readily  ascertained,  and  with  the  neat- 
est certainty  from  the  1st  and  2d  books  of  discipline,  of  the 
Scottish  church 4     In  that  church  there  was  never  any 

*  Quick's  Synodicon,  Vol.  I.  London,  1690. 

t  French  Church  Discipline.  Sect,  xii.,  Chapter  I.,  Can.  xxi.  The 
"Confession"  of  the  French  churches  was  drawn  up  in  1559.  Their 
discipline  was  subjected  to  revision  in  twenty-three  synods,  and  finally 
passed  about  1575. 

\  A  brief  history  of  these  documents  may  not  be  unacceptable  to  the 
reader.  They  are  commonly  referred  to  by  the  title,  "  Books  of  Policy." 
The  1st  book  was  compiled  by  John  Knox,  upon  the  basis  of  the  Gene- 
va "  Book  of  Common  Order,"  and  was  adopted  by  the  church  of  Scot- 
land, A.  D.  1561.  It  never  became  the  law  of  the' land,  the  Parliament 
being  unwilling  to  sanction  its  principles  on  the  subject  of  the  property 
of  the  church,  and  the  deacon's  office.  The  2d  book  was  an  improve- 
ment, in  some  respects,  upon  the  first.  It  was  finally  adopted  by  the 
General  Assembly  in  1578,  having  been  carefully  prepared  by  a  commit- 
tee appointed  for  that  purpose,  of  which  Andrew  Melville  was  a  member. 
The  Parliament,  however,  refused  to  ratify  the  2d  Book  of  Discipline, 
until  1592.  In  that  year  they  passed,  though  not  without  a  great  deal  of 
opposition,  the  principal  parts  and,  among  them,  those  most  obnoxious  to 
the  court  party.  M'Cric  has  the  following  foot  note  in  reference  to  this 
event,  in  his  "Life  of  Andrew  Melville,  page  235,  Oxford  (Ohio)  edition. 
•'The  heads  of  patronage,  divorce,  and  the  office  of  deacons,  were  the 
most  offensive  to  the  court,  and  consequently,  were  made  the  subject  of 
krageel  discussion.  The  ground  of  objection  to  the  last  of  these  heads 
was,  thai  it  gave  the  management  of  the  patrimony  of  the  church  to  the 
deacons."  The  last  remark  is  worth  remembering;  for  it  shows  that 
the  principles  of  the  Scottish  church,  on  the  subject  to  which  it  refers. 
were  adopted  deliberately,  after  careful  examination,  and  long  and  elabo- 
rate  discussion;  by  racfa  men,  too,  as  Andrew  Melville.  It  is  entitled, 
"The  Sec  .ii.l  Book  of  Discipline, or  Heads  and  Conclusions  of  the  Po- 
licy of  the  Kirk;  agreed  upon  in  the  Genera]  Assembly  1578;  inserted 
in  the  registers  of  assembly  1581  ;  sworn  to  in  the  National  Covenant; 
revived  and  ratified  by  the  assembly   1638,  and  bv  many  other  acts  of 


(     13     ) 

diversity  of  opinion  on  the  subject;  the  perpetuity  of  the 
deacon's  office  was  maintained  as  fully  and  as  plainly  as  of 
the  pastoral  office,  or  that  of  the  ruling  elder.  First  Book  of 
Discipline,  chapter  vii.:  "men  of  the  best  knowledge,  judg- 
ment, and  conversation,  should  he  chosen  for  elders  and 
deacons.  Their  election  shall  be  yearly,  where  it  may  be 
conveniently  observed."*  Second  Book  of  Discipline,  chap- 
ter ii.:  "Again,  the  whole  policy  of  the  kirk  consisteth  in 
three  things,  namely,  in  doctrine,  discipline  and  distribu- 
tion :  with  doctrine  is  annexed  the  administration  of  sacra- 
ments; and,  according  to  the  parts  of  this  division,  ariseth  a 
threefold  sort  of  officers  in  the  kirk,  to  wit,  of  ministers  or 
preachers,  elders  or  governors,  and  deacons  or  distributors  ; 
and  all  these  may  be  called  by  a  general  word,  ministers  of 
the  kirk."  Again,  in  the  same  chapter;  "  In  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  time  of  the  Evangel,  he  hath  used  the  ministry 
of  the  Apostles,  prophets,  evangelists,  pastors  and  doctors, 
in  administration  of  the  word;  the  eldership  for  good  or- 
der, and  administration  of  discipline;  the  deaconship  to  have 
the  care  of  the  ecclesiastical  goods.  Some  of  these  eccle- 
siastical functions  are  ordinary,  and  some  extraordinary,  or 
temporary.  Here  are  four  ordinary  functions  or  officers 
in  the  kirk  of  God;  the  office  of  the  pastor,  minister  or 
bishop ;  the  doctor,  the  presbyter,  or  elder,  and  the  deacon. 
These  offices  are  ordinary,  and  ought  to  continue  perpetu- 
ally in  the  kirk,  as  necessary  for  the  government  and  policy 
thereof:  and  no  more  officers  ought  to  be  received  or  suf- 
fered in  the  true  kirk  of  God,  established  according  to  his 
word." 

These  doctrines  were  no  dead  letter  in  that  church,  and 
in  the  hands  of  Knox  and  Melville.  They  ordained  dea- 
cons in  all  their  organized  congregations.  The  first  re- 
formed congregation  in  Scotland,  was  organized  in  Edin- 
burgh in  the  year  1556,  or  7,  by  the  election  and  ordina- 
tion of  elders  and  deacons.^    M'Crie,  in  his  Life  of  Knox,f 

assembly :  and  according  to  which,  the  church  government  is  established 
bylaw.     Anno  1592,  andl640." 

*  This  arrangement,  (the  yearly  election  of  elders  and  deacons,)  was 
rejected  as  unscriptural  in  the  2d  Book  of  Discipline;  and  with  evident 
propriety,  as  there  is  no  intimation  in  any  part  of  scripture  that  offices 
can  be  vacated  in  this  way  by  a  system  of  rotation.  This  plan  has  been 
all  along  retained  by  the  Holland  churches ;  and  is,  unquestionably,  a 
chief  cause  of  that  imbecility  of  the  ecclesiastical  government  which  ena- 
bled the  state  to  despoil  the  church  of  many  of  her  privileges. 

tM'Crie's  Life  of  Knox,  Oxford  edition,  page  65.  In  a  note  on  page 
95,  he  states  that  "the  number  of  elders  in  the  session  of  Edinburgh,  in. 
1560,  was  twelve,  and  of  deacons  sixteen." 

\  Same  edition,  page  87. 


(     14     ) 

says,  that  after  the  establishment  of  protestantism,  and  the 
adoption  of  the  1st  Book  of  Policy,  in  the  year  1560,  "  the 
affairs  of  each  congregation  were  managed  by  the  minis- 
ter, elders,  and  deacons,  who  constituted  the  kirk  session, 
which  met  regularly  once  a  week,  and  oftener  if  business 
required."     In  the  same  work,  page  126,  there  is  a  cir- 
cumstance related  which  proves  that,  until  Knox's  death, 
in  1572,  this  order  was  observed  in  the  church  in  Edin- 
burgh.    A  few  days  before  his  death,  this  great  reformer 
was  very  anxious  to  meet  once  more  with  the  session  of  his 
church — his  colleague,  the  elders,  and  deacons,  assembled 
in  his  room,  &c."    The  same  excellent  historian  states,  in 
his  Life  of  Andrew  Melville,*  that  "the  town  and  parish 
of  St.  Andrews  f  was  divided  into  districts,  and  over  each 
of  these  a  certain  number  of  elders  and  deacons  were  ap- 
pointed as  inspectors  and  visiters."    In  a  note  to  this  work 
(G  G)  there  is  an  extract  in  the  following  words,  from  the 
sessional  records  of  Glasgow :  "  November  14, 1583,  the  ses- 
sion appoint  an  inquest  to  be  taken  of  men  who  are  nei- 
ther elders  nor  deacons  for  this  year,  out  of  several  parts 
of  the  town."     And  another,  of  the  sessional  records  of  St. 
Andrews,  March  2,  1596,  containing  a  minute  of  a  meet- 
ing of  session,  "  appointed  to  try  the  life  and  conversa- 
tion of  the  whole  members  of  the  session,  as  well  min- 
isters as  elders  and  deacons."     These  facts  are  enough 
to  establish  the  practice  of  the  Scottish  church;  and  they 
show,  conclusively,  that  her  practice  accorded  with  her 
principles.     The  first  reformed  congregation  in  that  king- 
dom had  deacons  in  1556,  and  from  that  time  until  she 
reached  the  highest  point  of  that  reformation,  to  which 
she  attained  in  the  16th  century,  deacons  were  never  want- 
ing in  the  Scottish  churches. 

That  the  doctrines  and  practice  of  this  church  during 
the  second  reformation,  from  1638  to  1649,  were  the  same 
with  those  of  Knox  and  Melville,  can  be  very  readily 
shown.  The  2nd  Book  of  Discipline  was  revived  and 
ratified  by  the  assembly  1638.  Its  doctrines  in  regard  to 
deacons  which  we  have  already  quoted,  were,  of  course 
received  as  the  declared  principles  of  the  Scottish  Church 
at  that  time.  In  the  year  1645  the  form  of  church  go- 
vernment, compiled  by  the  Westminster  Assembly  of  Di- 
vines, w;is  adopted.  This  document  is  remarkably  ex- 
plicit on  the  subject  of  the  perpetuity  of  the  deacon's  office. 

*Same  edition,  page  278. 

t  Melville  wu  rector  of  the  University  of  St.  Andrews,  after  his  return 
in  1574  from  France. 


(    15    ) 

Deacons  are  mentioned  among  the  "ordinary  and  perpetual 
officers  of  the  church."     They  are  said  to  be   "  distinct 
officers  in  the  church,  whose  office  is  perpetuaV1     Again, 
11  It  is  requisite  that  there  be  others,  (officers  of  a  particular 
congregation,)  to  take  special  care  for  the  relief  of  the  poor." 
It  should  be  observed,  that  the  same  phraseology  is  used 
with  regard  to  the  ruling  elder;  "  It  is  requisite  that  there 
be  some  to  join  in  government;"*  plainly  showing  that 
they  considered  deacons  to  be  as  requisite  as  ruling  elders. 
As  has  been  remarked  respecting  the  opinions  of  the 
Scottish  Reformers  of  the  preceding  century,  these  senti- 
ments  were   carefully  and  deliberately  formed.     Many 
volumes  were  published  during  this  period  on  the  govern- 
ment of  the  Church.     In  these  we  find  elaborate  discus- 
sions on  the  office  of  the  deacon.     All  advocate  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Book  of  Policy.    Among  these,  Samuel  Ru- 
therford'sf  elaborate  work,  entitled,  "The  Due  Right  of 
Presbyteries,"  is  distinguished  for  ability  and  research. 
In  this  volume  he  takes  up  and  answers  fourteen  objec- 
tions to  the  office  of  the  deacon;  eight  of  these  respect  it  as 
mdinary  and  perpetual.     To  do  his  argument  justice,  it 
would  be  necessary  to  quote  very  largely.     A  few  extracts 
must  suffice.     He  replies  to  the  objection,  that  "  circum- 
stances gave  rise  to  the  institution  of  this  office,  and  that, 
consequently,   it  is  not  permanent,"   as  follows:    "The 
occasion  of  the  multiplying  of  disciples,  and  the  neglecting 
of  the  widows,  doth  not  prove  that  deacons  are  a  prudential 
and  temporary  institution;  for  here  I  distinguish  between 
an  occasion,  and  a  motive  and  cause:  divers  ordinances  of 
God  have  both  these."     Again,  he  answers  the  objection 
which  is  so  often  brought  forward  now,  that  deacons  are 
not  necessary,  "because  their  duties  can  be,  and  are,  per- 
formed by  other  ecclesiastical  officers,"  in  the  following 
terms:  "I  cannot  well  deny,  but  it  is  apparent  from  Acts 
vi.  4,  that  the  apostles  themselves  were  once  those  who 
cared  for  the  poor;  but  I  deny  that  hence  it  follows  in  the 
case  of  fewer  poor,  that  the  office  can  return  to  the  pastor 
as  to  the  first  subject,  J  except  you  suppose  the  intervention 

*  Confession  of  Faith,  Edinb.  Ed.  1836;  and  Philad.  Ed.  1838,  p.  574. 

t  Professor  of  Divinity  at  St.  Andrews.  This  volume  was  published 
in  London,  1644:  we  quote  from  pages  160,  163. 

J  "As  to  theirs/  subject.''''  Rutherford  does  not  deny  that  it  is  the 
duty  of  the  "  pastor  to  take  care  of  the  poor,"  for  to  this  part  of  the 
form  of  church  government  he  gave  his  assent.  By  "the  first  subject" 
of  office  power,  he  means  those  whose  special  duty  it  is  to  perform  any 
official  function:  as  the  ruling  elder  rules  as  his  special  charge,  the  pas- 


(    16    ) 

of  a  divine  institution  to  place  it  again  in  the  pastors— and 
considering  the  afflictions  of  the  churches,  the  object  of 
the  deacons  'giving'  and  'showing  mercy,'  as  it  is  Rom. 
xii.  8,  cannot  be  wanting,  as  that  the  Church's  fabric  be 
kept  in  good  frame,*  the  poor,  the  captives  of  Christian 
churches,  &c,  be  relieved." 

To  multiply  quotations,  when  those  already  made, 
though  few,  are  so  explicit  and  full,  would  be  burdensome. 
It  remains  only  to  show  that  these  principles  were  reduced 
to  practice.  This  might  be  inferred,  indeed,  from  the 
character  of  the  Scottish  church  at  that  brightest  period 
of  her  reformation.  However,  there  is  direct  and  ample 
testimony  that,  during  the  second  reformation,  the  church 
of  Scotland  had  deacons  in  all  her  congregations.  This 
we  find  in  the  laws  enacted  during  that  period:  the  most 
certain  kind  of  historical  evidence.  The  following  clause 
of  the  law  respecting  the  election  of  ruling  elders  was 
passed,  as  its  date  shows,  in  1642,  "and  the  fittest  and 
most  experienced  of  them  (heads  of  families)  may  be  sup- 
posed to  be  among  the  deacons.  Act  of  Ass.  Aug.  1st,  1642."f 
Could  such  a  clause  have  been  inserted  in  a  law,  if  there 
had  been  no  deacons  in  their  congregations?  A^ain,  in  the 
law  regulating  the  meetings  of  the  Kirk-Session,  is  the 
following  clause:  "The  deacons  are  always  present,  not  for 
discipline,  but  for  what  relates  to  their  own  office.  Act 
of  Ass.,  Aug.  10th,  1648. "J  Could  the  presence  of  the  dea- 
cons at  all  the  meetings  of  Session  have  been  stated  by 
the  Ceneral  Assembly,  both  as  zfact,  and  as  a  part  of  their 
ecclesiastical  order,  unless  there  had  been  such  officers  in 
the  church,  and  well  known  too?  Again,  in  the  year  1645, 
"the  elders  and  deacons  in  landward  parishes  were  author- 
ized (by  parliament)  to  name  collectors  of  the  excise. "§ 
Certainly  an  act  hard  to  account  for,  and  explain,  had  there 
been  no  deacons  at  that  time  in  the  parishes  of  the  Scottish 
Church! 

The  attainments  of  this  church  in  regard  to  her  go- 
tor  ministers  fit  the  altar,  as  his  special  work.  Yet  the  pastor  rules.  The 
pastor  and  elders  "take  care  of  the  poor;"  not  as  the  "  first  subjects  " 
of  this  official  dutv,  hut  as  intrusted  with  the  whole  oversight  of  the 
affairs  of  the  house  of  God.  To  perform  this  duty,  there  must  be  deacons 
who  are  the  "  first  subjects"  of  it,  then  the  pastor  and  elders  act  with* 
them,  as  the  pastor  rules,  not  alone,  but  with  elders  ordained  to  that  spe- 
cial charge. 

*  Rutherford  does  r.ot  restrict  this  office  to  the  care  of  the  poor  only. 

t  Stewart's  Coll.,  Book  I.,  Tit.  vii.,  Sect.  2. 

%  Do.  Book  I.,  Tit.  xi.,  Sect.  2. 

§  Stevenson's  History  of  the  Church  and  State  of  Scotland,  Edin.  1753. 
n.  1120. 


(     17     ) 

vernment  and  order,  were  retained  with  fidelity;  cherished 
with  affection;  and,  as  far  as  their  trying  circumstances 
admitted,  carefully  and  conscientiously  applied,  by  the 
covenanters,  long  after  the  mad  and  cruel  policy  of  Charles 
II.,  and  the  violence  of  persecution,  had  broken  down  the 
carved  work  of  the  sanctuary  in  those  lands.  Renwick 
and  his  suffering  brethren  declare  most  solemnly,  in  the 
very  darkest  hour  of  Scotland's  night  of  persecution,  their 
steadfast  adherence  to  "  the  ordinary  and  perpetual  officers 
of  the  church  by  Christ's  own  appointment;  such  as  pas- 
tors, doctors,  elders,  and  deacons."*  This  profession  was 
renewed  by  the  scattered  societies  of  Covenanters,  in  their 
declaration  emitted  at  Sanquahar  in  1692.  f  Renwick 
writes  to  Sir  Robert  Hamilton,  in  the  year  16S5,  or  6,  that 
he  "  was  about  to  ordain  some  more  elders  and  some  dea- 
cons "% 

The  reformation  attained  its  greatest  height  in  Scotland. 
Whatever  refers  to  the  government  of  the  church,  as  well 
as  to  doctrine  and  worship,  was  better  known  and  more 
generally  practised  in  Scotland  than  in  England.  A  brief 
notice  of  the  southern  portion  of  the  British  isles,  in  con- 
nexion with  the  subject  of  the  deacon's  office,  will,  there- 
fore, suffice.  It  is  well  known  that  the  reformation  in  the 
16th  century,  brought  about  through  the  instrumentality 
of  Henry  VIII. ,  was  lamentably  imperfect.  However, 
many  of  the  ministry  and  members  of  the  English  esta- 
blishment looked,  with  a  favourable  eye,  from  the  first, 
upon  the  endeavours  of  their  brethren  in  other  countries 
particularly  in  Scotland,  after  a  more  scriptural  and  tho- 
rough reformation.  As  early  as  the  reign  of  Edward  VI. § 
some  foreigners  who  had  taken  refuge  in  that  country  from 
troubles  on  account  of  religion  in  their  own,  formed 
themselves  into  congregations,  organized  chiefly  according 
to  the  Presbyterian  model. ||  M'Crie  says,^[  that  "the 
affairs  of  each  congregation  were  managed  by  a  minister 
ruling  elders,  and  deacons;  and  each  of  these  offices  was 
considered  as  of  divine  institution."  Cranmer,  and  other 
eminent  Englishmen,  treated  them  with  great  kindness 

*  In  the  year  1687.  See  Informatory  Vindication,  N.  Y.  Ed  1834 
p.  197. 

tDo.  p.  318. 

fRenwick's  Letters,  Let.  LIE.  p.  184,  Edin.  1714.  See  Note  A. 
for  some  observations  on  the  dropping  of  the  deacon's  office  in  the  Scot- 
tish church. 

§  He  reigned  from  1547  to  1553. 

||  They  had  superintendents:  in  this  they  departed  from  strict  Presby- 
terianism. 

%  Note  xviii.  to  the  Life  of  Knox. 
3 


(     18     ) 

and  were  well  inclined  to  their  form  of  government. 
Nothing  was  accomplished  towards  a  better  reformation 
until  the  following  century.  In  the  year  1616  the  In- 
dependents formed  their  first  congregation  by  the  "ordi- 
nation of  ruling  elders  and  deacons."*  The  opinions 
of  the  Independents  of  that  century  are  expressed  by  the 
very  celebrated  Dr.  Owen,f  in  his  treatise  on  Church 
Government.  He  says,  speaking  of  Acts  vi.  1 — 6,  "it 
was  the  institution  of  a  new  office,  and  not  a  present  supply 
in  a  work  or  business,  which  they  designed."  And  again; 
••  Xor  was  this  a  temporary  institution  for  that  season,  and 
so  the  officers  appointed  extraordinary;  but  was  to  abide  in 
the  church  throughout  all  generations.'"  He  speaks  of  the 
deacon,  in  the  same  connexion,  as  a  known  and  existing 
officer,  remarking,  that  "  the  original  institution,  nature, 
and  use  of  the  office  of  deacons  in  the  church  were  so  well 
known'''  that  it  "was  not  necessary  to  insist  much  on 
them." 

At  a  later  period,  when  the  principles  of  the  Scottish  re- 
formation had  taken  root  in  England,  the  views  of  the 
English  reformers  upon  the  deacon's  office,  are  very  de- 
cidedly expressed  in  that  form  of  church  government  com- 
piled by  the  Westminster  Assembly,  from  which  quota- 
tions have  already  been  made.!  These  views  were  ably 
advocated  by  several  divines  of  Zion's  College,  London, 
in  a  work  entitled  "The  Divine  Right  of  Church  Govern- 
ment." In  this  essay  they  say§  that  "  deacons  are  ordinary 
officers  in  the  church  of  God,  of  which  she  will  have  con- 
stant use  in  cdl  ages,  and  which,  at  first,  were  divinely  ap- 
pointed, and  after,  frequently  mentioned  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament." 

This  brings  to  a  close  our  historical  review  of  the  purer 
periods  of  the  Reformed  Churches.  Many  of  the  descen- 
dants of  the  British  reformers  have  dropped  the  office  of  dea- 
con, although  they  still  retain,  in  their  published  creeds  and 
confessions,  the  principles  of  the  scriptures,  and  of  their  fa- 

*  Neat's  Hist,  of  the  Puritans,  Vol.  I.  p.  462. 

tOwcn  was  not  a  Congregationalism  as  that  appellation  is  now  under- 
stood.    He  was  much   nearer  to  Presbyterianism  in  his  sentiments  on 
church  government,  than  any  other  form  subsisting  in  our  times. 
Page  l.'). 

§  P.  1  10.  'I'his  work  was  written  1>\  these  eminent  divines  in  the  year 
1645,  during  the  sessions  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  to  defend  the  Pres- 
byterian principles  of  tin-  English  Covenanters  against  the  Erastians  and 
Independents,  who  were  making  very  decided  opposition  to  their  intro- 
duction  into  that  kingdom.  It  contains,  perhaps,  the  most  complete  de- 
fence of  the  Divine  Righl  of.Presbyterianism  ever  issued. 


(      19     )        « 

thers,  in  reference  to  this  office.  In  France  and  Holland 
they  still  have  deacons:  they  have  never  ceased  to  have  them 
since  the  reformation.  The  Scottish  establishment,  the 
Reformed  Presbyterian  Church,  both  in  Britain  and  Ameri- 
ca; the  Presbyterian  Synod  of  Ulster,  in  Ireland ;  the  As- 
sociate Presbyterian  Church;  the  Associate  Reformed  and 
the  General  Assembly  Presbyterian  Church,  in  the  United 
States,  and  some  other  denominations,  still  retain  in  their 
standards  the  substance,  and  most  of  them,  the  very  language 
of  the  Westminster  divines  on  this  subject.  Of  course, 
all  these  bodies,  how  different  soever  their  practice,  pro- 
fess to  believe,  as  their  fathers  in  the  time  of  the  Reforma- 
tion did,  that  "  the  deacon's  office  is  ordinary  and  perpe- 
tual." And,  although  these  denominations  have  dropped 
in  part,  or  altogether,  this  office,  we  yet  find  writers  of 
eminence  expressing  themselves  with  great  explicitness 
on  the  subject.  The  language  of  John  Brown  of  Had- 
dington is  peculiarly  strong  and  decided.  He  says,* 
"  There  is  no  hint  in  scripture  that  the  offices  of  ruling 
elder  and  deacon  were  designed  to  be  temporary — no  con- 
gregation can,  therefore,  ans?ver  to  Jesus  Christ  for  the 
dropping  of  deacons,  any  more  than  for  the  dropping  of 
ruling  elders."  Similar  sentiments  are  found  in  other  au- 
thors. Indeed,  almost  without  exception,  those  who  have 
noticed  the  subject  at  all,  (and  they  are  not  few,)  have  ex- 
pressed their  regret  that  the  churches  have  so  often  de- 
parted, with  respect  to  the  deacon's  office,  from  both  the 
scriptures  and  their  own  professed  principles. 

Now,  why  have  they  so  departed  ?  Can  there  be  an}r 
good  reason  assigned  why  all  congregations  should  not  have 
deacons,  as  the  Christian  congregations  had  in  Jerusalem, 
in  Greece,  in  Asia  Minor,  in  the  whole  Christian  world 
in  the  apostolic  times,  and  in  all  the  Reformed  Churches? 
Can  any  apology  be  offered  for  neglecting  this  part  of  the 
organization  given  to  the  church  by  her  blessed  Head? 
Will  it  be  said  that  there  is  no  need  of  deacons;  that  there 
are  no  labours  for  the  deacon  to  perform?  Perhaps  it 
may  be  found  that  more  than  one  mistaken  notion  is  con- 
tained in  such  a  view.  "The  poor,"  says  Christ,  "ye 
have  always  with  you."  Therefore,  were  it  so  that  the 
deacon's  office  embraces  no  more  extended  ran^e  of  duties 
than  those  involved  in  the  taking  care  of  the  poor,  (a  great 
mistake,  however,  as  will  be  soon  shown,)  we  have  the 
authority  of  Christ  himself  for  affirming  that  the  deacon 
should  always  be  reckoned  among  the  church's  officers. 

*  Body  of  Divinity,  Book  vii.  Chap.  II.  and  Dictionary  of  the  Bible, 
under  the  word  "  Deacon." 


(     20      ) 

And,  assuredly,  if  it  be  the  duty  of  the  Christian  church 
to  feed  the  hungry,  and  clothe  the  naked,  and  promote 
the  comfort  of  the  destitute,  it  is  hard  to  believe  that  she 
may  dispense  with  that  very  office,  which  the  gracious 
King  of  Zion  has  instituted  to  attend  continually  to  this 
very  thing. 

Perhaps  it  may  be  found,  that  hwnan  wisdom  has  con- 
trived to  distribute  the  duties  of  the  deacon's  office;  assign- 
ing some  to  other  ecclesiastical  officers,  some  to  civil  offi- 
.  and  some  to  individuals,  while  some  may  be  neglected 
altogether;  so  as  to  render  this  officer  of  Christ's  appoint- 
ment apparently  unnecessary.  What  right  have  men  in 
this  manner  to  re-arrange  any  part  of  the  church's  order, 
and  then  pronounce  a  part  of  it  to  be  unnecessary?  For 
example,  what  right  and  warrant  have  the  pastor  and  el- 
ders of  a  congregation  to  set  aside  the  deacon,  and  under- 
take to  perform  his  duties?  Would  not  the  same  process 
of  reasoning  be  equally  available  to  set  aside  the  ruling 
elder?  All  Presbyterians  maintain  that  the  pastor  is  to 
rule  in  the  congregation.  W ould  it  be  right  to  supersede 
the  elder,  by  coolly  asserting,  that,  as  the  power  of  govern- 
ment belongs  to  the  ministry,  it  is  unnecessary  to  ordain 
ruling  elders?  Would  any  Presbyterian  grant  this?  Yet 
the  steps  in  the  argument  are  precisely  the  same.  It  is 
granted — it  is  maintained,  that  the  ruling  elder's  office 
embraces  within  it  that  of  the  deacon;  but  this  no  more 
warrants  the  neglect  to  appoint  deacons,  than  the  fact  that 
the  pastor's  office  embraces  that  of  the  ruling  elder,  war- 
rants the  church  to  commit  her  government  entirely  to 
the  ministry.*  Moreover,  as  will  appear  in  the  sequel, 
to  dispense  with  the  deacon,  throws  too  heavy  a  burden 
upon  those  who  would  undertake  his  duties,  in  addition  to 
their  own. 

Perhaps,  it  may  be  asked,  "  Have  our  fathers  been 
in  the  wrong  in  this  matter?  Have  they  not  lived  usefully, 
been  edified,  and  died  in  faith,  without  recognising  either 
the  validity  or  importance  of  this  office?"  All  this  is  not  our 
business.  The  question  is  not,  whether  has  the  church 
been  more  or  less  guilty,  but  what  does  Jesus  Christ  re- 
quite of  us?  Besides,  our  fathers  of  the  reformation  had  dea- 
cons,  all  the  Reformed  churches  had  them.  In  neglecting 
to  ordain  them,  we  have  forsaken  their  footsteps:  and  the 
longer  we  have  strayed,  the  greater  need  to  turn  and  re- 
form. "They  have  been  edified  without  this  office  in 
their  congregations."     True,  and  many  a  soul  has  gone 

*  See  quotation  from  Rutherford's  Due  Right  of  Presbyteries,  p.  15. 


(     21     ) 

to  heaven  from  congregations  where  they  never  had  a 
ruling  elder.  The  great  and  good  President  Edwards, 
during  the  greater  part  of  his  life,  belonged  to  a  church 
that  had  no  ruling  elders.  This  has  nothing  to  do  with 
the  subject.  The  question  is  not,  whether  the  deacon  is 
essential  to  the  organization  of  a  congregation,  or  not.  This 
is  not  affirmed.  But  is  it  not  the  will — the  command  of  the 
church's  Head,  that  this  class  of  officers  be  ordained  in  the 
church?  This  has  been  proved  from  scripture,  and  con- 
firmed by  the  "  footsteps  of  the  flock."  The  deacon  is 
a  standing  ecclesiastical  officer.     What  are  his  duties? 

CHAPTER  II. 

The  Nature  of  the  Deacon'' s  Office. 

On  the  subject  of  this  chapter  there  has  long  been,  and 
still  is,  great  diversity  of  opinion  and  practice.  Nearly 
all  Christian  churches  agree,  at  least  in  theory,  that  the 
Deacon's  office  constitutes  a  part  of  the  order  of  God's 
house.  There  is  not  the  same  unanimity  of  sentiment 
respecting  the  nature  of  this  office,  and  the  duties  of  the 
deacon.  Episcopalians  maintain  that  it  is  a  spiritual 
office,  and  that  deacons  are  an  order  of  preachers;  Conore- 
gationalists,  that  the  deacon  rules  in  spiritual  things.  Epis- 
copalians are  clearly  in  error  upon  this  subject,  because, 
neither  in  the  narrative  (Acts  vi.  1 — 6)  of  its  original  in- 
stitution, nor  in  any  other  passage  of  scripture  referring  to 
the  office  of  the  deacon,  is  there  any  intimation  that  the 
deacon  was  intended  to  be  a  minister  of  the  gospel.  But 
the  very  contrary.  The  express  intention  of  the  office  is 
said  to  be,  the  relief  of  the  apostles  from  a  portion  of  their 
labours,  that  they  might  have  leisure  for  the  ministry  of 
the  word.  Ver.  3,  4:  "whom  we  may  appoint  over  this 
business.  But  we  will  give  ourselves  continually  to  prayer, 
and  to  the  ministry  of  the  word."  Nothing  can  be  more 
evident  than  this:  that  the  "  business  "  of  the  deacons,  and 
the  "  ministry  of  the  word,"  are  different  employments; 
and,  indeed,  that  proper  attention  to  the  one  is  somewhat 
inconsistent  with  due  attention  to  the  other.  It  is  impos- 
sible that  a  class  of  officers  expressly  instituted  to  relieve 
the  ministry  from  the  burden  of  attending  to  pecuniary 
affairs,  should  themselves  be  gospel  ministers.  The  preach- 
ing of  Philip*  is  easily  explained.  He  became  an  evan- 
gelist, (Acts  xxi.  8,)  having  "  purchased  to  himself  a  good 
degree."! 

*  Acts  viii.  5.  1 1  Tim.  iii.  13. 

3* 


(     22     ) 

The  deacons  of  Congregational  churches  resemble  very 
much  the  ruling  elders  of  Presbyterian  churches.*  This, 
also,  is  an  evident  departure  from  the  scripture  model. 
There  is  not  the  most  remote  intimation  that  the  deacon 
was  designed  to  rule.  His  "  business  "  is  plainly  stated, 
to  be  attendance  upon  certain  duties  connected  with,  and 
belonging  to  the  care  of  fiscal  concerns;  but  not  a  word 
respecting  government  as  attached  to  this  office. f 

To  the  office  of  the  deacon  belongs, 

I.  The  Care  of  the  Poor. 

It  is  evident  from  the  account  in  Acts  vi.  1 — 6,  that  the 
deacons  were  designed  to  take  special  care  to  promote  the 
comfort  of  the  poor.  The  disciples  had  made  up,  with 
remarkable  liberality,  a  large  common  stock.J  From 
this  stock  all  were  supported.  The  poor  had  their  supply 
from  this  source.  In  Rom.  xii.  8,  the  duties  of  the  dea- 
conship  are  said  to  be  "giving"  and  "showing  mercy." 
That  the  church  at  that  time  acknowledged  her  obliga- 
tions to  furnish  support  to  the  poor,  needs  no  proof.  The 
manner  in  which  this  subject  is  referred  to  in  the  narra- 
tive of  the  original  institution  of  this  office,  and  elsewhere, 
fully  warrants  the  inference  that  one  part,  and  an  impor- 
tant one,  of  the  deacon's  duties,  is  the  oversight  and  care 
of  the  temporal  condition  of  the  poor.§>  This  is  generally 
admitted.  It  is,  therefore,  unnecessary  to  dwell  longer 
upon  the  proof. 

The  apostolic  churches  felt,  as  well  as  acknowledged, 
their  obligations  in  reference  to  the  care  of  the  poor,  par- 
ticularly widows  and  orphans.  ||  To  attend  to  this  sacred 
duty  they  chose,  and  ordained  deacons.  Nor  is  it  to  be 
supposed,  that  their  duty  to  the  poor  was  limited  to  the 
mere  furnishing  them  with  pecuniary  support.  The  high 
qualifications  required  in  the  deacons,^"  warrant  us  to  infer 
that  they  have  a  wider  range  of  duty.  Moreover,  pecu- 
niary assistance  is  not  that  which  is  alone,  or  chiefly, 
needed  by  the  objects  of  the  Christian's  charities.     They 

*  Dwlght'e  Theology,  Sermon  civ. 

t  Congregationalists  limit  the  ollice  of  the  deacon,  so  far  as  it  is  con- 
cjerned  with  pecuniary  affairs,  entirely  to  the  supply  of  the  poor.  See 
same  .sermon.  This,  as  will  ho  seen  in  the  sequel,  is  unscriptural,  and 
at  variance  with  the  doctrines  and  practice  of  the  purest  churches. 

X  A.ts  ii.  44,  45;  iv.  32—37. 

§See  1  Tim.  v.  3 — 16;  Rom.  xii.  7,  R;  1  Pet.  iv.  11. 

||  They  must  be  "  widows  indeed."  Those  who  could  maintain  them- 
selves, or  had  relations  to  provide  for  them,  were  not  to  he  burdensome 
to  the  church. 

1  1  Tim.  iii.  R— 13. 


(     23     ) 

need  advice  and  encouragement.  The  young,  especially  or- 
phans, require  to  be  properly  educated,  and  their  steps  go- 
verned by  the  hand  of  kindness  and  charity.  For  want 
of  proper  instruction  and  counsel,  how  many  baptized 
children,  whose  parents  have  been  removed  from  them  by 
death,  have  been  lost  to  the  church,  and  to  themselves! 
Here  is  a  wide  field  to  be  occupied  by  the  deacon;  he 
must  feed  the  poor,  as  the  almoner  of  the  church's  bounty; 
and  he  must  do  more.  He  must  give  to  the  necessitous 
advice,  and  impart  to  them  comfort;  not  as  a  spiritual 
guide,  but  as  a  kind  friend,  and  particularly,  as  sustain- 
ing to  the  desolate  and  friendless  orphan,  a  relation  al- 
most as  intimate  as  the  parental. 

The  importance  of  this  department  of  the  deacon's  du- 
ties cannot  be  doubted.  All  we  want  is,  a  more  lively  sense 
of  the  condition  of  the  poor  and  solitary,  and  conviction  of 
the  church's  duty  to  supply  all  their  need.  That  this  duty 
will  ever  be  properly  felt,  or  attended  to,  uniformly  and 
systematically,  until  deacons  are  ordained  in  the  congre- 
gations, there  can  be  no  hope.  The  pastor  and  the  ruling 
elders  have,  it  is  true,  an  official  responsibility  on  this 
subject,  of  which  they  cannot  divest  themselves.  But  all 
pastors  and  sessions  will  find  in  their  own  experience, 
where  they  endeavour  to  perform  their  spiritual  functions 
conscientiously,  the  need  of  just  such  relief  as  the  ordina- 
tion of  a  board  of  active  deacons  would  furnish.  This  is 
particularly  true  of  the  pastor.  He  must  devote  much 
time  to  study  and  private  meditation,  that  he  may  be  able 
" rightly  to  divide  the  word  of  truth,"  as  "a  workman 
that  needeth  not  to  be  ashamed."  This,  with  the  cares  of 
government;  visiting  the  sick;  family  visitation;  cate- 
chising, &c,  furnish  ample  employment  for  the  most  ro- 
bust and  industrious  minister  of  the  gospel.  Who  is  to 
collect  funds  for  the  poor;  to  inquire  into  their  state;  to 
furnish  them  with  what  they  require  for  maintenance- 
and  to  watch  over  the  children  of  deceased  or  helpless 
church  members  ?  The  elders  might  attend  to  all  this,  but 
not  as  it  should  be  attended  to.  Nor  is  it  their  special 
duty.  It  is  a  distinct,  and  often  a  very  large  field  of  opera- 
tion, from  the  other  duties  of  the  eldership,  and  is  liable 
to  be  neglected.  The  remedy  is  to  be  found  in  the  or- 
dination of  a  competent  number  of  deacons.  That  they 
may  perform  all  their  duties  in  this  matter,  congregations 
should  be  furnished  with  these  scriptural  officers,  accord- 
ing to  Christ's  institution,  and  the  practice  of  the  church 
of  Christ  in  her  purest  times. 


(     24     ) 

II.  The  Deacons  sliould  collect  and  distribute  all  the  Contribu- 
tions for  ecclesiastical  Purposes. 

This  office  was  not  instituted  solely  to  attend  to  the 
poor.  The  functions  of  the  deacon's  office  embrace  the 
charge  of  all  the  ecclesiastical  goods.  This  has  been  the 
doctrine  of  the  great  body  of  Presbyterians  from  the  ear- 
liest periods.  Independents  and  Congregationalists  re- 
strict this  office,  so  far  as  the  care  of  funds  is  concerned, 
to  those  set  apart  for  the  poor.*  The  scriptures,  and  the 
"  footsteps  of  the  flock,"  both,  with  equal  explicitness,  con- 
firm our  views  of  this  subject. 

I.  The  Scriptures. 

Acts  vi.  1 — 6  :  "And  in  those  days,  when  the  number 
of  the  disciples  was  multiplied,  there  arose  a  murmuring 
of  the  Grecians  against  the  Hebrews,  because  their  wi- 
dows were  neglected  in  the  daily  ministration.  Then  the 
twelve  called  the  multitude  of  the  disciples  unto  them,  and 
said,  It  is  not  reason  that  we  should  leave  the  word  of 
God,  and  serve  tables.  Wherefore,  brethren,  look  ye  out 
among  you  seven  men  of  honest  report,  full  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  and  wisdom,  whom  we  may  appoint  over  this  busi- 
ness. But  we  will  give  ourselves  continually  to  prayer, 
and  to  the  ministry  of  the  word.  And  the  saying  pleased 
the  whole  multitude;  and  they  chose  Stephen,  a  man  full 
of  faith  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  Philip,  and  Procho- 
rus,  and  Nicanor,  and  Timon,  and  Parmenas,  and  Nico- 
las, a  proselyte  of  Antioch :  whom  they  set  before  the 
apostles :  and  when  they  had  prayed,  they  laid  their  hands 
on  them." 

This  passage  contains  the  history  of  the  appointment 
of  the  first  deacons  in  the  New  Testament  church. f  That 
we  may  have  a  complete  view  of  the  whole  of  this  trans- 
action, we  must  go  back  a  little,  and  ascertain  what  was 
"the  daily  ministration''1  of  verse  1,  the  "serving  tables" 
of  verse  2,  and  the  "  business"  of  verse  3.  This  we  learn 
from  chapter  ii.  44,  45:  "And  all  that  believed  were 
together,  and  had  all  things  common  ;  and  sold  their  pos- 
sessions and  goods,  and  parted  them  to  all  men,  as  every 
mem  had  need.  And  chapter  iv.  32 — 37  :  "  And  the  mul- 
titude of  them  that  believed  were  of  one  heart  and  of  one 
soul :  neither  said  any  of  them  that  aught  of  the  things 
which  he  possessed  was  his  own :  but  they  had  all  things 

•  Bee  D wight' 8  Theology.     Sermon  civ. 
t  See  Miller  on  the  Ruling  Elder,  page  219. 


(     25     ) 

common.  And  with  great  power  gave  the  apostles  wit- 
ness of  the  resurrection  of  the  Lord  Jesus  :  and  great  grace 
was  upon  them  all.  Neither  was  there  any  among  them 
that  lacked:  for  as  many  as  were  possessors  of  lands  or  houses 
sold  them,  and  brought  the  prices  of  the  things  that  were 
sold,  and  laid  them  down  at  the  apostles'  feet:  and  distribu- 
tion was  made  unto  every  man  according  as  he  had  need" 
6fC. 

From  these  passages,  it  appears  that  the  "  daily  minis- 
tration "  was  the  management,  for  public  purposes,  of  a 
common  stock  created  by  the  contributions  of  the  disci- 
ples :  that  from  this  stock  all  the  ecclesiastical  expenses 
were  defrayed,  and,  likewise,  the  poor,  if  there  were  any, 
supported.  The  apostles,  and  other  ministers,  were  sup- 
ported from  this  fund ;  and  the  other  charges  (and  there  must 
have  been  some)  attendant  upon  the  dispensation  of  the 
Lord's  Supper,  and  other  ordinances,  were,  unquestiona- 
bly, defrayed  out  of  it,  for  there  was  no  other  source  whence 
they  could  be  drawn.  It  is  plainly  impossible  that  there 
could  have  been  any  fund,  at  that  time,  distinct  from  this 
common  stock,  or  another  fund  under  the  control  of  dis- 
tinct officers,  such  as  the  Trustees  or  Committees  of  mo- 
dern times.  Such  officers  could  not  have  existed.  The 
funds  required  for  the  promotion  of  the  good  of  the  whole 
body,  and  to  meet  all  demands  upon  the  church,  were 
"  thrown  together  at  the  apostles'  feet."* 

Indeed,  the  very  circumstance  that  is  sometimes  relied 
upon  as  favouring  the  view,  that  the  "widows"  were 
chiefly  concerned  in  this  ministration ;  namely,  that  when 
they  "were  neglected"  the  deacons  were  appointed,  is,  of 
itself,  enough  to  show  that  "this  business"  was  not  mere- 

*It  should  be  remarked  here,  that  a  part  of  the  transactions  recorded 
in  these  passages  was  extraordinary,  and,  consequently,  not  a  rule  to  others. 
The  casting  all  their  property  into  a  common  slock  was  extraordinary. 
This  is  manifest  from  the  case  of  Ananias  and  Sapphira.  Acts  v.  1 — 10. 
Peter  says :  "  Whilst  it  remained  was  it  not  thine  own?  and  after  it  was 
sold  was  it  not  in  thine  own  power?"  The  liberality  of  these  disciples 
exceeded.  In  other  respects,  their  conduct  was  according  to  those  laws 
of  moral  duty,  which  are  universally  binding  upon  church  members: 
who  are  always  under  obligations  to  take  care  of  the  poor;  to  maintain 
the  ministry ;  to  make  other  necessary  provision  for  attendance  upon, 
and  dispensation  of,  gospel  ordinances;  to  spread  the  gospel,  and  to 
promote  the  temporal  welfare  of  the  brethren  as  they  have  opportunity. 
To  accomplish  these  purposes  this  common  fund  was  formed:  but  with 
extraordinary  liberality,  so  "  that  none  among  them  lacked. "  This  was 
the  more  remarkable,  as  the  multitude  of  foreign  Christians  at  Jerusa- 
lem was,  probably,  great  at  that  time. 


(26) 

ly  attending  to  the  poor.  For  then  it  would  follow  that 
the  apostles  had  altogether  neglected  to  attend  to  the  very 
object  for  which  the  contributions  were  thrown  at  their 
feet!  This  is  impossible.  It  therefore  appears  plain, 
that  there  were  other  objects  contemplated  in  the  forma- 
tion of  this  fund,  attention  to  which  interfered  in  some 
degree  with  due  attention  to  the  "  Grecian  widows." 

The  "business"  over  which  the  deacons  were  appoint- 
ed was  the  whole  of  this  daily  ministration — the  whole 
service  of  the  tables.  The  apostles  themselves  say,  re- 
ferring to  the  whole  of  that  charge,  which  they  had  at  first 
undertaken,  and  for  a  time  managed,  that  the  deacons  were 
appointed  "over  this  business."  It  is  plain,  therefore,  that 
the  entire  fund  formed  by  contributions  for  ecclesiastical 
purposes,  was  at  first  managed  by  the  apostles,  and  by 
them  transferred  to  the  deacons.  There  could  have  been 
at  that  time  no  other  officer,  such  as  a  trustee  or  committee- 
man, appointed  to  any  part  of  this  charge.  The  whole 
was  first  placed  in  the  apostles'  hands,*  the  whole  was 
placed  in  the  hands  of  the  deacons  when  they  were  or- 
dained. These  are  the  views  which  have  been  enter- 
tained of  this  passage  by  the  purest  churches,  and  by  the 
greater  part  of  judicious  commentators. 

As  this  passage  has  a  very  important  bearing  upon  our 
investigations  respecting  the  deacon's  duties,  a  few  quota- 
tions, and  but  a  few,  for  our  space  is  limited,  are  given  from 
standard  commentators;  with  the  hope  that  the  reader  will 
carefully  examine  the  passage,  in  the  light  thus  reflected, 
upon  it.  These  quotations  are  not  classified  ;  our  limits 
do  not  admit  of  this.  They  are  given,  however,  nearly  in 
the  order  of  time,  beginning  with  Orige?i,  one  of  the  early 
fathers.  He  lived  in  the  commencement  of  the  third  cen- 
tury, a  little  more  than  one  hundred  years  after  the  death 
of  the  apostle  John.  He  says,  "  The  deacons  preside  over 
the  money  tables  of  the  church,"  and  adds,  "as  we  are 
taught  in  the  Acts  of  the  apostles. r 'f 

Passing  over  many  centuries,  our  next  quotation  is  from 
Beza,  the  distinguished  colleague  of  John  Calvin,  in  the 
Theological  School  at  Geneva.  He  explains  the  passage, 
"  To  serve  tables'" — "to  attend  to  that  which  was  then  ob- 
served, the  common  tables,  and  the  other  necessities  of  the 
churchy  \ 

The  Scottish  Reformers,  in  the  Second  Book  of  Disci- 

*  Acts,  Chapters  ii.  and  iv.  t  Treatise  16th  upon  Matthew. 

\  Commentary  on  Acts  vi.  2. 


(     27     ) 

pline,  chapter  ix.,  are  very  explicit.  "  In  the  apostolic 
kirk,  the  deacons  were  appointed  to  collect  and  distribute 
what  sum  soever  was  collected  of  the  faithful,  to  distribute 
unto  the  necessity  of  the  saints ;  so  that  none  lacked  among 
the  faithful.  These  collections  were  not  only  of  that  which 
was  collected  in  manner  of  alms,  as  some  suppose,  but  of 
other  goods  moveable  and  immoveable,  of  lands  and  posses- 
sions, the  price  whereof  was  brought  to  the  feet  of  the  apos- 
tles."* 

Henry. f  "And  these  (the  deacons)  must  take  care  of 
the  church's  stock;  must  review,  and  pay,  and  keep  ac- 
counts; must  buy  those  things  which  they  had  need  of 
against  the  feast,  (John  xii.  29,)  and  attend  to  all  those 
things  which  are  necessary,"  in  ordine  ad  spiritualia,  "in 
order  to  spiritual  exercises,  that  every  thing  might  be  done 
decently,  and  in  order,  and  no  person  or  thing  neglected." 

Scott. f  "  To  lay  out  their  contributions  in  the  most  sa- 
tisfactory manner,  both  among  the  poor  and  in  other  ne- 
cessary expenses." 

GuYSE.f  "As  all  the  necessary  expenses  for  carry- 
ing on  the  worship  of  God,  and  as  the  apostles  them- 
selves, as  well  as  the  poor,  were  doubtless  to  be  supported 
out  of  the  common  stock,  I  have  given  such  a  paraphrase 
as  may  take  in  the  Lord's  table,  and  the  tables  of  the 
apostles." 

Dick.!  "I*  *s  true,  indeed,  that,  as  the  design  of  the 
institution  was  not  to  divert  the  attention  of  the  apostles 

*  This  quotation  from  the  Second  Book  of  Discipline  should  have  the 
most  respectful  consideration.  The  nature  of  the  deacon's  office  was 
closely  and  actively  examined  in  Scotland  for  many  years  previously  to 
the  compilation  and  adoption  of  this  Book  of  Policy.  The  reformers 
contended  for  the  deacon's  office,  as  instituted  to  attend  to  all  the  church's 
temporalities,  while  Mary,  and  her  son  James  VI.  were  violently  opposed 
to  the  deacon.  The  discussion  was  protracted  and  zealous.  The  court 
party  contending  that  the  contributions  laid  at  the  apostles'  feet  were  alms 
for  the  poor  alone  ;  the  reformers  advocating  the  doctrine  we  have  quoted. 
No  opinion  was  ever  formed  more  deliberately,  or  under  circumstances 
belter  calculated  to  elicit  the  truth. 

t  On  Acts  vi.  1 — 6. 

X  Dick's  Theology,  Lee.  c.  This  remark  is  introduced  here,  as  it  evi- 
dently refers  to  Acts  vi.  1 — 6.  It  was  drawn  from  this  distinguished  the- 
ologian by  the  force  of  truth:  for,  in  the  same  paragraph,  he  endeavours 
to  "  apologize  "  for  the  neglect  to  appoint  "  deacons  in  all  their  congre- 
gations," by  saying  that  ruling  elders  can  perform  all  their  duties!  Had 
this  intelligent  divine  fixed  his  eye  steadfastly  upon  the  scriptural  office, 
as  he  admits  it  to  be,  of  the  deacon,  to  attend  to  all  the  temporal  con- 
cerns of  the  church,  instead  of  "apologizing"  for  the  neglect  to  ap- 
point them,  and  thus  soothing  the  church  in  her  negligence,  he  would 
have  been  led  to  use  his  great  influence  in  restoring,  in  that  large  de- 
nomination to  which  he  was  attached,  this  almost  forgotten  part  of  the 
church's  organization,  to  its  true  nositinn. 


(     28     ) 

from  the  ministry  of  the  word,  the  care  of  the  temporal 
matters  in  which  the  church  is  concerned  may  be  considered 
as  belonging  to  deacons." 

Dr.  Miller,  of  Princeton.  "  It  is  not  suitable  that  we 
should  leave  the  word  of  God,  and  devote  ourselves  to  pe- 
cuniar ij  affairs."* 

These  quotations  are  sufficient  to  show,  that  the  inter- 
pretation we  have  given  of  the  passage  under  considera- 
tion is,  by  no  means,  singular.  Other  testimony  will  be 
adduced  soon,  from  sources  equally  entitled  to  considera- 
tion, to  establish,  farther,  the  principles  we  have  laid 
down  in  reference  to  the  duties  of  the  deacon. 

The  early  Christians,  in  committing  the  management  of 
all  the  ecclesiastical  goods  to  none  but  ordained  officers, 
did  precisely  what  the  members  of  the  church  had  all 
along  been  doing,  at  least  for  fifteen  centuries.  During 
the  Old  Testament  dispensation,  this  order  had  always 
been  observed ;  at  least  from  the  giving  of  the  Mosaic  law. 
The  funds  set  apart  for  ecclesiastical  purposes  were  de- 
rived from  various  sources,!  some  of  them  peculiar  to  the 
Jewish  economy,  others  moral  and  permanent,  but  from 
whatever  source,  or  however  contributed,  they  were,  with- 
out any  exception,  committed  to  the  priests  and  LevitesJ 

The  only  instance  in  which  there  even  appears  to  have 
been  a  departure  from  this  invariable  rule,  established  by 
express  divine  appointment,  occurred  in  the  reign  of  Joash 
(or  Jehoash.)§  This  King,  under  very  peculiar  circum- 
stances, assumed  to  some  extent  the  direction  of  the  funds, 
to  be  employed  in  repairing  the  temple.  This  direction 
extended,  however,  no  farther  than  to  the  issuing  of  an  or- 

*  A  foot  note  to  p.  227,  of  the  treatise  upon  the  Ruling  Elder,  con- 
tains so  judicious  a  commentary  upon  Acts  vi.  2,  that  it  is  inserted  en- 
tire. He  says,  "  It  has  been  supposed  by  many  that  the  phrase  4  serving 
tables,'  in  the  history  of  the  institution  of  the  deacon's  office,  had  a  re- 
ference either  to  the  Lord's  table,  or  to  overseeing  and  supplying  the 
tables  of  the  poor,  or  perhaps  both.  But  I  am  inclined  to  believe  that 
this  is  an  entire  mistake.  The  word  te]o.tttla,  signifies,  indeed,  a  table; 
but,  in  this  connexion,  it  seems  obviously  to  mean  a  money  table,  or  a 
counter,  on  which  money  was  laid.  Hence  t^artf^itrju  a  money  changer 
or  money  merchant.  See  Matt.  xxi.  12,  xxv.  27;  Mark  xi.  15;  Luke 
xix.  23.  The  plain  meaning,  then,  of  Acts  vi.  seems  to  be  this: — "It 
is  not  suitable  that  we  should  leave  the  word  of  God  and  devote  our- 
selves to  pecuniary  tqffain"  The  passage  iVom  Origen,  quoted  above, 
is  conclusive  evidence  of  the  soundness  of  this  criticism. 

t  Num.  iii.  47 — 51;  Lev.  v.  17;  chap.  xxvi.  27,  28,  xxix.,  and  Neh. 
x.  87—89. 

%  For  a  complete  list  of  all  the  passages  in  the  Old  Testament  scrip- 
tures that  relate  to  the  administration  of  the  church's  finances,  see  note 
B.    An  abstract  is  there  given  of  them. 

§  2  Kings  xii.  2,  and  2  Chron.  chap.  xxiv. 


(     29     ) 

der  to  prepare  a  chest  and  place  it  at  the  door  of  the  tem- 
ple,* and  the  appointment  of  an  officer  (the  king's  scribe, 
or  the  secretary  of  state,)  to  be  present  with  Jehoiada,  the 
high  priest,  or  some  one  acting  for  him,  when  the  money 
deposited  in  the  chest  was  emptied  out  and  counted. f     In 
all  this  transaction  there  was  no  infringement  upon  the 
law  enacted  by  the  God  of  Israel  respecting  the  eccle- 
siastical funds.     The  chest  was  at   all  times  in  charge 
of  the  Levites  ;$  the  highest  ecclesiastical  officer  was  al- 
ways present,  and  actively  employed  in  the  management 
of  these  funds,  with  the  king's  scribe,^  while  the  presence 
of  the  latter  was  in  the  exercise  of  that  extraordinary  pow- 
er which  belonged  to  the  kings  of  Judah,  and  was  often 
exercised  in  times  of  disorder,  by  which  they  obliged  all 
their  subjects,  not  excepting  ministers  of  religion,  to  attend 
to  their  respective  duties.  ||     This  event,  therefore,   fur- 
nishes no  exception  to  the  observation  made  respecting  the 
principle  as  always  acted  upon  in  ordinary  circumstances. 
That  for  so  many  centuries,  by  the  immediate  direction 
of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  God  of  Israel,  the  ecclesias- 
tical goods  should  have  been  committed  to  none  but  or- 
dained officers,  is  a  fact  from  which  we  may,  certainly, 
derive  some  instruction.     It  is  not  affirmed  that  the  mode 
of  administering  the  ecclesiastical  finances  under  the  Old 
Testament,  is  literally  applicable  in  all  its  particulars  now; 
but  we  may  and  ought  to  deduce  the  moral  principles 
which  pervaded  that  dispensation,  and  apply  them  in  refe- 
rence to  this  subject,  as  well  as  others,  on  all  suitable  occa- 
sions.   In  civil  order  what  was  moral  under  the  Old  Testa- 
ment economy,  is  still  binding.     Why  should  its  light  and 
power  be  entirely  rejected  in  matters  of  ecclesiastical  order? 
"What  was  typical  is  done  away,  but  what  was  moral  still 
remains.  *|[ 

*  2  Kings  xii.  9.    It  is  here  said,  that  "Jehoiada,  the  priest  took  a 
chest,"  &c. 

t  Ver.  10. 

%  Ver.  9. 

§  Ver.  10. 

||  2  Chron.  xv.  xxix.  xxxiv. 

TJ  Ignorance  of  this  principle  or  unwillingness  to  apply  it,  has  led  to 
lamentable  disregard  in  civil  things,  of  the  wise  provisions  of  the  Jew- 
ish constitution.  The  London  divines  reply  to  the  objection  that  "  argu- 
ments for  the  form  of  church  government,  must  not  yet  be  fetched  from  the 
Jewish  Church. — "2.  We  answer,  the  laws  of  the  Jewish  Church, whether 
ceremonial  or  judicial,  so  far  are  in  force,  even  at  this  day,'  as  they  were 
grounded  upon  common  equity,  the  principles  of  reason  and  nature,  and 
were  serving  to  the  maintenance  of  the  moral  law.  The  Jewish  polity 
is  only  abrogated  in  regard  of  what  was  in  it  of  particular  right,  not  of 
4 


(     30     ) 

Is  there  any  thing  typical  in  the  principle  which  has 
been  brought  to  view?  Is  there  any  thing  in  it  which 
renders  its  application  in  New  Testament  times  impracti- 
cable, or  unsafe,  or  derogatory  to  Jesus  Christ?  The  con- 
duct of  the  disciples  after  the  day  of  Pentecost,  when  un- 
der the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  they  cast  their  con- 
tributions at  the  apostles'  feet,  furnishes  a  satisfactory  an- 
swer to  these  interrogatories.  Moreover,  the  apostle  Paul, 
in  the  ix.  chap,  of  1st  Cor.,  enforces  the  duty  of  contri- 
buting to  the  maintenance  of  the  gospel  ministry,  by  de- 
ductions from  the  Mosaic  economy. 

The  organization  of  the  Jewish  synagogue,  confirms 
the  view  just  presented  of  the  moral  character  of  the  prin- 
ciples imbodied  in  the  constitution  of  the  church,  during 
the  former  dispensation,  in  regard  to  the  management  of 
tiscal  concerns.  In  the  language  of  Dr.  M'Leod,  "  There 
were  several  officers  in  the  Jewish  synagogue,  and  these 
were  authorized  to  conduct  the  public  worship,  preserve  the 
order,  and  manage  the  finances  of  the  congregation."*  This 
latter  officer  was  the  chazan  or  deacon  of  the  synagogue  :\ 
and  in  the  words  of  Prideaux,  "the  chazanim,  that  is,  over- 
seers, who  were  also  fixed  ministers,  and  under  the  rulers 
of  the  synagogue,  had  the  charge  and  oversight  of  all  things 
in  it,  kept  the  sacred  books  of  the  law,  and  the  prophets, 
and  other  Holy  Scriptures,  as  also  the  books  of  their  public  li- 
turgies, and  all  other  utensils  belonging  to  the  synagogue." 
The  order  of  the  synagogue  was,  as  all  presbyterians  hold, 
the  model  of  that  of  the  church  under  the  New  Testament  dis- 
pensation. In  the  synagogue  was  an  officer  who  attended  to 
the  poor,  had  the  oversight  of  the  place  of  worship,  and 
managed  the  finances.  This  fact  furnishes  additional  evi- 
dence that  the  deacon's  office  is  not  solely  the  care  of  the 
poor.  The  chazan  of  the  synagogue  had  the  care  of  the 
poor  as  a  part  only  of  his  charge:  the  oversight  of  the  fis- 
cal affairs  of  the  synagogue  belonged  to  him.  Such  officers 
as  the  trustee  or  committee-man  of  modern  days,  w7ere  not 
known  either  in  the  order  of  the  synagogue,  or  of  the  apos- 
tolic churches. 

common  right:  so  fur  as  there  was  in  their  laws  either  a  typicalncss  pro- 
per t<»  their  church,  or  a  peculiarnese  of  respect  to  their  Btate  in  that 
land  of  promise  given  nnto  them.  Whatsoever  the  Jewish  church  had 
not  as  ./<  irish,  but  as  it  was  a  political  church,  or  an  <  ct/<siastical  re- 
public, doth  belong  to  the  Christian  church."  Divine  Right,  &e.  p.  202. 
Ignorance  of  this  principle,  or  its  true  application,  not  the  principle  it- 
self, has  confirmed  Episcopalians  in  their  erroneous  views  of  church  go- 
vernment. It  should  not  be  rejected  on  that  account. 
*  Ecc.  Cat.  Quest.  51.        t  Prideaux's  Connexions,  Part  I.  Book  VI. 


(    31    ) 

The  scripture  argument  for  committing  all  the  ecclesi- 
astical goods  to  deacons,  may  be  briefly  stated  thus :  Both 
under  the  Old  and  New  Testament  dispensations,  the  Bi- 
ble contains  frequent  allusions  to  the  funds  devoted  to  ec- 
clesiastical uses — in  all  cases  these  were  managed,  until 
the  canon  of  divine  revelation  was  completed,  by  ordained 
officers,  and  such  officers  only;  during  the  Old  Testament 
dispensation  by  priests  and  Levites,  during  the  new  by  dea- 
cons. Nor  does  the  Bible  contain  any  account  of  officers 
distinct  from  these,  and  unordained,  to  whom  the  fiscal  con- 
cerns of  the  church  either  mere  or  might  be  committed. 
The  consequence  is  plain.  Any  other  officers  for  the  ma- 
nagement of  church  funds  are  of  human  invention,  and 
where  they  exist,  occupy  a  place  which  should  be  occu- 
pied by  officers  chosen  and  set  apart  for  this  service  accord- 
ing to  Christ's  institution. 

II.  The  duty  of  the  deacon  to  collect  and  disburse  all  the  or- 
dinary revenues  of  the  congregation,  has  been  generally  ac- 
knowledged and  practised  upon  by  the  church  of  Christ. 

Origen,  in  the  passage  already  quoted,  says,  that  "  the 
deacons  preside  over  the  money  tables  of  the  church." 
Jerome,  who  wrote  in  the  fourth  century,  calls  deacons  the 
"  ministers  of  tables  and  widows."  Zozomen,  an  ecclesi- 
astical historian  of  the  fifth  century,  says,  speaking  of 
preceding  times,  that  "  the  deacon's  office  was  to  keep  the 
church's  goods."  Without,  however,  entering  into  an 
examination  in  detail  of  the  history  of  the  early  periods  of 
the  church,  let  the  authority  of  Calvin,  respecting  the  of- 
fice of  the  deacon  during  these  times,  suffice.  He  says,* 
"  Nor  was  the  situation  of  deacons  at  that  time  (the  Ni- 
cene  period)  at  all  different  from  what  it  had  been  under 
the  apostles.  For  they  received  the  daily  contributions 
of  the  faithful,  and  the  annual  revenues  of  the  church,  to  ap- 
ply them  to  their  proper  uses;  that  is,  to  distribute  part  to 
the  ministers  and  part  for  the  support  of  the  poor." 

The  sentiments  of  Calvin  himself,  (easily  discovered  in 
the  above  extract,)  are  found  plainly  expressed  in  the 
same  work,  where  he  says,  vol.  iii.  p.  100,  "Now,  let  the 
deacons  come  forward,  with  that  most  sacred  distribution 
which  they  have  of  the  property  of  the  church.  And,  more 
explicitly,  in  his  sermons  on  the  1st  Epistle  to  Timothy, 
ser.  24th,  "But  the  deacons  have  the  treasures  of  the 
church  to  dispense,  that  is  to  say,  such  as  are  wholly  dedi- 
cated to  God,  and  ought  not  in  any  wise  to  be  applied  to 
profane  uses.  .  .  .     For  the  goods  of  the  church  (as  we 

*  Institutes,  vol.  iii.  p.  74. 


(     32     ) 

call  them)  ought  to  be  applied  no  other,  but  to  the  use  of 
the  church,  that  is  to  say,  tofindihe  ministers,  to  find  school 
masters  *  which  serve  to  preserve  the  seed  of  the  church,  and 
such  other  like  things,  and  specially  to  find  the  poor."  These 
doctrines  spread  from  Geneva  over  the  neighbouring  king- 
doms, but  not  in  all  to  the  same  extent.  They  were  adopt- 
ed, so  far  as  circumstances  allowed,  in  France,  and  Hol- 
land ;  and  entirely  in  Scotland.  In  the  French  churches 
the  ministry  were  provided  for,  and  the  other  necessities 
of  the  church,  as  well  as  the  wants  of  the  poor  attended  to, 
by  the  ministration  of  deacons.  In  one  instance,  indeed, 
the  first  of  these  might  be  committed  to  other  persons; 
namely,  when  the  revenue  out  of  which  this  item  of  ex- 
pense was  to  be  defrayed,  arose  from  the  rent  of  "  a  tene- 
ment, "f  Yet  even  in  this  case  the  persons  charged  were 
to  be  "  commissioned  and  ordained  by  the  church."  The 
Holland  church  was  never  strong  enough  to  throw  off  the 
Erastian  power  of  the  government;  they  always  had  dea- 
cons in  their  congregations;  but  in  many,  perhaps  most 
instances,  the  funds  for  the  church's  maintenance  were 
drawn  directly  from  the  coffers  of  the  state.  In  some  cases 
these  officers  were,  however,  accountable  to  the  consistory. 
The  principles  of  Junius  and  other  Holland  divines  were 
scriptural,  but  their  circumstances  were  unfavourable  to 
the  application  of  them.J 

^  The  1st  Book  of  Discipline  contains  the  principles  of 
Knox  and  the  earliest  reformers  in  Scotland.  They  say, 
chap,  xvii.,  "The  deacons  should  take  up  the  wholerentsofthe 
kirk,  disponing  them  to  the  ministry,  the  school,  and  the 
poor  within  their  bounds,  according  to  the  appointment  of 
the  kirk."  After  nearly  twenty  years'  investigation,  the 
doctrines  of  the  church  of  Scotland  on  this  subject  were 
expressed  in  the  2d  Book  of  Discipline,  as  follows:  chap. 
viii.:  "Their  office  and  power  (the  deacons')  is  to  receive 
and  to  distribute  the  whole  ecclesiastical  goods  unto  them, 
to  whom  they  are  appointed."  And  chap,  ix.,  "  The  goods 
ecclesiastical  ought  to  be  collected  and  distributed  by  the 
deacons,  as  the  word  of  God  appoints,  that  they  who  hear  of- 
fice in  the  kirk  he  provided  for,  without  care  or  solicitude."^ 
It  has  been  shown  that  these  principles  were  carefully  che- 

Thifl  was  a  common  opinion  at  the  Reformation.  It  was  a  favour- 
ite idea  of  John  Knox.  The  principles  of  the  first  IJook  of  Discipline, 
respecting  schools  and  school  funds,  might  be  studied  even  now  with 
great  profit. 

t  French  Church  Discipline,  Sec.  xii.  chap.  I.  Canon  xliii. 

%  Gerard  Brandt's  Hist  Ref.  I  loll. 

§  For  Farther  quotations  from  this  chap,  see  pages  13  and  27. 


(     33     ) 

rished,  and  faithfully  contended  for  by  the  reforming  church 
of  Scotland,  for  more  than  thirty  years,  against  the  almost 
unremitting  opposition  of  the  civil  power,  before  they  were 
admitted  by  the  Parliament,  and  sanctioned  by  the  law  of 
the  land.  The  Scottish  church  refused  to  accept  of  a  full 
establishment  upon  any  other  principles.  The  2d  Book 
of  Discipline  remained,  in  fact,  unsanctioned  by  the  laws 
of  the  land  for  fourteen  years,  from  1578  to  1592,  chiefly 
because  the  friends  of  truth,  and  the  advocates  of  Christ's 
crown  rights,  refused  to  modify  these  principles  on  the 
subject  of  the  deacon's  office.* 

This  Book  of  Discipline  was  sworn  to  in  the  national  co- 
venant, and  revived  and  ratified  by  the  General  Assembly 
1638.  It  continued  to  be  received  as  the  church's  Book  oi 
Policy  during  the  whole  of  the  second  reformation.  The 
Scottish  Covenanters  never  either  altered  or  modified  these 
principles  for  which  Knox  and  Melville,  and  a  host  of  wor- 
thies had  contended  so  long,  and  suffered  so  much.  If  they 
did,  where  is  the  evidence?  Where  is  the  declaration,  or 
the  law? 

Perhaps  some  may  suppose  a  change  to  have  been  in- 
tended in  the  adoption  of  the  form  of  church  government, 
drawn  up  at  Westminister,  which  says  that  "the  deacon 
is  to  take  special  care  of  the  poor."  In  regard  to  this,  let 
it  be  remarked,  First,  the  language  employed  is  not  at  all 
inconsistent  with  the  doctrines  of  the  Book  of  Discipline. 
It  is  merely  said  that  the  deacon  has  a  special  business,  by 
no  means  affirming  that  it  is  his  only  business.!  Second, 
such  a  supposition  is  at  variance  with  the  avowed  design 
of  the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant.  The  first  paragraph 
of  that  covenant  is  in  the  following  words :  "  That  we  shall 
sincerely,  really,  and  constantly,  through  the  grace  of  God, 
endeavour  in  our  several  places  and  callings,  the  preser- 
vation of  the  reformed  religion  in  the  Church  of  Scotland, 
in  doctrine,  worship,  discipline,  and  government,  against 
our  common  enemies."  Will  it  be  said  that  the  Scottish 
Church  intended  to  throw  aside  her  attainments,  and  re- 
construct her  order?  The  contrary  was  then  and  always 
declared.  But,  her  principles  respecting  the  deacon's  of- 
fice were  no  more  an  exception  than  those  respecting  the 
pastor  or  the  ruling  elder.  Third,  their  adherence  to  their 
previous  order  and  policy,  is  expressly  asserted  in  the  acts 

*  See  foot  note,  p.  12,  and  Knox  and  Calderwood's  histories,  and 
M'Crie's  Lives  of  Knox  and  Melville. 

t  More  respecting  this  phraseology  on  pages  38  and  39, 

4* 


(     34     ) 

adopting  the  directory  for  worship,  and  the  form  of  church 
government,      The   act   adopting   the   former   has    this 
clause  :  It  is  also  provided,  "  That  this  shall  he  no  prejudice 
to  the  order  and  practice  of  this  kirk,  in  such  particulars  as 
are  appointed  by  the  Books  of  Discipline,  and  acts  of  Gene- 
ral Assemblies,  and  are  not  otherwise  ordered  and  appoint- 
ed in  the  directory."     This  shows  that  every  part  of  these 
books,  not  expressly  repealed,  was  still  considered  to  be  the 
doctrine  and  order  of  the  Scottish  Church.     Where  is 
there  an  express  repeal  of  the  principles  of  the  Second 
Book  of  Discipline  respecting  the  deacon  ?     Had  they  al- 
tered their  doctrines,  they  must  have  repealed  many  laws. 
Where  are  the  laws  repealing  former  enactments  ?     There 
are  none.     The  first  sentence  of  the  act  adopting  the  di- 
rectory runs  as  follows  :  "  The  General  Assembly  being 
most  desirous  and  solicitous,  not  only  of  the  establishment 
and  preservation  of  the  form  of  kirk  government  in  this 
kingdom,  according  to  the  word  of  God,  Books  of  Disci- 
pline, acts  of  General  Assemblies,  and  National  Covenant, 
SfC  4-c."  Fourth,  among  the  interrogatories  put  to  the  elders 
of  every  congregation  at  the  annual  presbyterial  visita- 
tion,* respecting  the  pastor,  is  the  following:  "And  hath 
he  deacons  in  the  parish  distinct  from  elders?"     Among 
those  put  to  the  pastor;  "  Are  the  deacons  faithful  in  their 
office,  in  calling  and  distributing  all  the  kirk  goods,  and  in 
having  a  care  of  the  sick  poor?     Is  your  session  rightly 
constitute,  and  all  the  elders  and  deacons  duly  admitted 
according  to  the  acts  of  Assembly?"     Fifth,  it  should  be 
remembered,  that  when  this  form  of  government  was  adopt- 
ed, the  Church  of  Scotland  had  for  more  than  half  a  cen- 
tury, not  only  professed,  but  (making   some   allowance 
for  the  time  of  the  oppressions  of  James  VI.  and  his  son 
Charles  I.,)  had  practised  upon,  the  doctrines  of  the  Books 
of  Discipline  respecting  the  deacon's  office :   that  seven 
years,  from  1638  to  1645,  had  elapsed  from  the  renovation 
of  the  National  Covenant:  that  there  were  deacons  in  her 
congregations  actively  employed  in  the  discharge  of  their 
duties.     Now,  where  is  the  law  stripping  them  of  a  part 
of  their  office,  and  appointing,  or  allowing  to  be  appointed, 
committee  men  or  trustees,  to  fill  the  vacancy?     There  is 
no  such  law.     There  were  no  such  officers.     Could  so 
great  a  change  have  taken  place  in  so  short  a  time — in  an 
instant  almost — unheard  of  and  unremembered  ?  We  may 
rest  assured  that  Scotland  in  her  best  days  never  repudiated 

*  Stewart's  Coll.,  Book  I. 


(     35     ) 

the  doctrines  or  the  practice  of  her  noble  reformers  on  this 
part  of  the  order  of  the  house  of  God.* 

The  divines  of  the  Scottish  Church  during  that  period, 
whose  sentiments  have  come  down  to  our  times,  while 
they  lay  great  stress,  and  with  evident  truth  and  propri- 
ety, upon  the  duty  of  the  deacon  to  take  special  care  of  the 
poor,  the  sick,  &c,  do  not  limit  his  office  to  this  business 
alone.  Rutherford,  as  we  have  seen,  considered  the  "  keep- 
ing of  the  church's  fabric  in  good  repair"  as  belonging  to 
the  deacon's  duties. |  David  Dickson,  an  eminent  divine, 
and  a  very  active  and  influential  member  of  the  Reform 
ing  Assembly,  1638,  says: J  "  But  the  deacons  not  a  little 
aided  by  their  ministrations;  for  they  took  care  respecting 
the  salary  of  ministers,  and  the  necessities  of  the  saints,  and 
distributed  the  public  goods  of  the  church."  Again,  on 
1  Timothy  iii.  8:  "As  to  that  which  belongs  to  the  elec- 
tion of  elders  and  of  the  guardians  of  the  public  treasury.1' % 
And  again,  on  Romans  xii.  8:  "He  that  giveth."  "The 
official  treasurers  of  the  church  are  referred  to;  those  who 
distribute  the  goods  of  the  church,  and  the  contributions  of 
the  faithful,  for  the  public  uses  of  the  church." \\ 

The  divines  of  England,  although  the  church  in  that 
part  of  the  island  did  not  attain  so  high  a  point  of  refor- 
mation as  the  northern,  held  similar  views  on  this  subject; 
not  in  all  cases,  however,  so  clearly  and  decidedly.  The 
celebrated  John  Owen  is  very  explicit.  He  says,^[ "  Where- 
as, the  reason  of  the  institution  of  this  office  was,  in  gene- 
ral, to  free  the  pastors  of  the  church,  who  labour  in  word 
and  doctrine,  from  avocations  by  outward  things,  such  as 
wherein  the  church  is  concerned;  it  belongs  unto  the  dea- 
cons not  only  to  take  care  of  and  provide  for  the  poor,  but. 
to  manage  all  other  affairs  of  the 'church  of  the  same  kind; 
such  as  are  providing  for  the  place  of  the  church-assem- 
blies,— of  the  elements  for  the  sacraments,  of  keeping,  col- 
lecting, and  disposing  of  the  stock  of  the  church,  for  the 
maintenance  of  its  officers,  and  incidencies,  especially  in  the 

*  In  the  act  abolishing  patronages,  passed  March  9,  1649,  one  reason 
assigned  by  Parliament  is,  that  patronage  is  "  contrary  to  the  second  Book 
of  Discipline."     These  words  are  Italicised  in  the  act. 

t  See  quotation  from  his  "  Due  Right  of  Presbyteries."     P.  15. 

J ExpositioEpistolarum,  1645,  on  Corinthians  xii.  28,  "helps."  "Dia- 
coni  autem  miniisteris  non  parum  opitulabantur,  de  stipendiis  ministro- 
rum,  et  sanctorum  necessitatibus  prospicientes,  et  publicae  facultates  dis- 
pensantes."  This  work  was  published  the  very  year  that  the  form  of 
church  government  was  adopted. 

§  The  same  work.  |)  Do.  on  this  text. 

II  Treatise  on  Church  Government,  chap.  ix. 


(     36     ) 

time  of  trouble  and  persecution."  These  views  were,  at 
least,  not  uncommon  among  the  English  Protestants,  Pres- 
byterian and  Independent.  Owen  observes,  in  the  same 
chapter,  that  "  the  deacon's  office  was  so  well  known  as  to 
render  it  unnecessary  to  insist  much  on  it."  He  described 
no  novelty  to  the  English  churches,  in  defining  the  deacon 
as  an  officer  to  whom  belongs  the  management  of  all  the 
temporalities  of  the  church.  The  London  divines  say; 
''the  deacons  being  specially  to  be  trusted  with  the  church's 
goods,  and  the  disposal  thereof,  according  to  the  direction  of 
the  presbytery,  for  the  good  of  the  church,  fyc."*  The 
"good"  not  of  the  poor  alone,  but  " of  the  church." 

These  doctrines  have  been  reiterated  by  many  commen- 
tators and  divines  since  the  reformation.  The  opinions  of 
Henry,  Scott,  Guyse,  and  Dick,  have  been  already  quoted 
in  our  pages. f  Brown  of  Haddington  defines  the  deacon 
to  be  "an  officer  in  the  church,  whose  business  it  is  to 
serve  in  distributing  the  elements  at  the  Lord's  table,  and 
to  provide  for  and  duly  distribute  support  to  ministers,  and, 
to  the  poor."%  Ridgley,  after  mentioning  pastors  and 
ruling-elders  as  church  officers,  adds,  "  others,  who  have 
the  oversight  of  the  secular  affairs  of  the  church,  and  the  trust 
of  providing  for  the  necessities  of  the  poor  committed  to  them, 
who  arc  colled  deacons." ^  Dr.  Gill,  on  Acts  vi.  2:  "  And 
they  (the  deacons)  are  likewise  to  serve  the  minister's  table,  by 
taking  care  that  he  has  a  sufficient  competency  for  his  sup- 
port," and  on  1  Cor.xii.28,  the  word  "helps"  or  "rather  the 
deacons  of  churches,  whose  business  it  is  to  take  care  of 
tables;  the  Lord's  table,  the  ministers,  and  the  poor,  and  all 
the  secular  affairs  of  the  church."  John  Fairley,  an  esteem- 
ed minister  of  the  Reformed  Presbyterian  church  in  Scot- 
land, says  of  deacons:  "  their  office  relates  to  the  necessities 
of  the  poor,  and  external  concerns  of  the  church." \\  Dr. 
Miller,  of  Princeton  Theological  Seminary,  well  known 
as  ;i  very  learned  and  able  writer  upon  church  government, 
says,  that  "the  function  to  which  the  deacpn  was  appointed 
by  the  apostles,  was  to  manage  the  pecuniary  affairs  of  the 
church,  and  especially  to  preside  over  the  collections  and 
disbursements  for  the  poor."T[ 

*  Divino  Right,  &c„  p.  184.  t  On  p.  27. 

{  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  on  the  word  "  Deacon."  It  is  not  so  evi- 
dent, as  this  very  candid  and  excellent  writer  appears  to  think,  that  the 
deacon  should  serve  at  die  Lord's  table. 

Body  of  Divinity,  Philad.  Ed.  Vol.  II.  p.  553. 

||  See  his  Sermon  preached  at  the  opening  of  the  Synod,  May  1816. 

"jj  On  the  Ruling  Elder,  p.  242. 


(     37     ) 

Let  us  now  direct  our  attention  to  the  standards  of  afew  of 
the  Protestant  Presbyterian  churches.  The  Reformed  Pres- 
byterian church  in  Scotland,  in  her  Testimony,  expresses 
her  views  in  the  following  terms:  "Deacons  are  ordained 
upon  the  choice  of  the  congregation,  and  are  associated  with 
the  teaching  and  the  ruling  elders  in  distributing  to  the  ne- 
cessities of  the  poor,  and  managing  other  temporalities  in 
the  church."*  The  same  church  in  the  United  States: 
"The  deacon  has  no  power  except  about  the  temporalities  of 
the  church' 'f  He  has,  of  course,  "  power  about  the  tempo- 
ralities." The  Associate  Presbyterian  Church  defines  this 
office  thus:  "The  deacon  is  to  take  care  of  the  poor,  and  to 
distribute  among  them  the  collections  that  may  be  raised 
for  their  use.  It  also  belongs  to  him  to  provide  the  elements 
for  the  Lord's  table,  and  other  necessaries,  and  in  general 
the  charge  and  disposal  of  the  funds  or  temporalities  of  the 
church,  according  to  the  direction  of  the  session,  devolve 
on  him. "|  The  General  Assembly  Presbyterian  church, 
after  stating  that  the  office  of  the  deacon  "  is  to  take  care  of 
the  poor,"  &c,  adds;  utothem  also  may  be  properly  committed 
the  management  of  the  temporal  affairs  of  the  church. ' '  §  This 
statement  they  confirm  by  Acts  vi.  3,  5,  6.  It  is  plain  that 
this  church  intends  to  say,  that  by  the  authority  of  the 
Head  of  the  church  the  management  of  the  temporal 
affairs  of  the  church  may  properly  be  committed  to  the 
deacon;  or  else,  why  adduce,  in  proof,  that  very  passage 
of  scripture  which  is  employed  to  establish  the  duty  of 
the  deacon  to  take  care  of  the  poor,  and  of  the  funds  des- 
tined for  their  supply?  || 

*  Testimony,  Ed.  of  1837,  chap.  xi.  sect.  11. 

t  Reformation  Principles  Exhibited,  chap,  xviii. 

%  Book  of  Government  and  Discipline,  1817,  chap.  ii.  This  body  has 
lately  revised  her  book  of  government,  &c.  The  paragraph  quoted  above, 
has  been  altered  to  read  as  follows:  "To  the  deacon  belong  the  care  of 
the  poor,  and  the  management  of  the  temporalities  of  the  church,"  chap, 
iii.  sect.  7.  It  will  be  perceived,  that  the  doctrines  are  the  same,  only 
more  tersely  expressed.  For  other  opinions,  see  also  Douglas'  Errors 
in  Religion,  N.  Y.  Ed.  p.  65.  Taylor's  Spiritual  Despotism,  N.  Y.  Ed. 
p.  321;  and  Buck's  Dictionary  under  the  word  "Deacon,"  all  of  whom 
concur  in  sentiment  with  the  writers,  and  church  standards  quoted. 

§  Form  of  Government,  chap.  vi. 

||  The  following  extract  from  a  "  Catechism  on  the  Government  and 
Discipline  of  the  Presbyterian  church,"  compiled  by  Presbyterian  Divines 
in  Britain,  and  which  has  had  a  large  circulation  in  the  Scottisb  churches, 
and  in  the  Presbyterian  Synod  of  Ulster,  shows  that  the  doctrines  advo- 
cated in  this  essay  are  taught  in  these  churches.  The  quotations  which 
follow  are  from  the  third  edition,  Glasgow,  1838,  chap.  i.  Quest.  15. 
"  What  are  the  ordinary  church-officers  appointed  by  Christ"?  Ans.  Pres- 
byters  or  Elders  (called   also   Bishops  or  Overseers)  and  deacons." 


(     33     ) 

It  may,  perhaps,  occur  to  the  mind  of  the  reader  as  an 
objection  to  the  view  that  has  been  given  of  the  opinions 
of  the  churches,  and  of  protestant  writers,  that  they  so 
often  affirm  that  the  deacon  is  an  officer  appointed  "  to  take 
care  of  the  poor."  This  phraseology  is  met  with  so  fre- 
quently, that  a  superficial  reader  of  ecclesiastical  history, 
will  be  liable  to  infer  that  the  protestant  church  has  not 
been  so  unanimous  in  assigning  to  the  deacon  the  charge 
of  all  the  temporalities,  as  would  seem  from  the  historical 
view  just  given.  For  example,  Calvin,  in  his  discourses 
upon  1  Tim.  iii.  8 — 13,  says,  "But  the  deacons  are  they 
which  are  appointed  to  have  the  care  of  the  poor,  and  to 
distribute  the  alms."  And  again:  "There  must  be  deacons 
to  have  the  care  of  the  poor."  Such  expressions  occur  fre- 
quently in  these  discourses;  and  were  we  to  stop  here,  and 
examine  them  no  farther,  we  would  infer  that  Calvin  limit- 
ed the  deacon's  duties  to  the  care  of  the  "  alms,"  strictly 
so  called,  or  the  "poor's  money."  Farther  examination 
of  these  very  discourses,  however,  shows  us  that  such 
an  inference  would  furnish  a  very  mistaken  notion  of 
Calvin's  real  sentiments  upon  this  subject:  for  he  proceeds 
to  say,  "  The  deacons  have  the  treasures  of  the  church  to  dis- 
jyense,  tyc.;"  and  with  greater  minuteness  observes,  that 
"  the  goods  of  the  church  ought  to  be  applied  to  find  the 
ministers,  &c."*  So  in  the  1st  Book  of  Discipline,  chap, 
vii.,  the  office  of  the  deacon  is  said  to  be  "  to  gather  and 
distribute  the  alms  of  the  poor."  Taking  this  expression 
alone,  and  were  there  no  other  intimation  in  this  document, 
or  elsewhere,  of  the  doctrines  of  the  church  of  Scotland 
respecting  the  deacon's  office,  the  inference  would  appear 
to  be  correct,  that  she  restricted  the  deacon  to  the  oversight 
of  the  poor  alone.  But  in  chap.  xvii.  the  principles  of 
that  church,  on  this  subject,  are  fully  exhibited:  and  there 
it  is  said  to  be  the  duty  of  the  deacons,  "  to  take  itp  the 
whole  rents  of  the  ki?'k,  disposing  them  to  the  ministry,  &c."f 
By  examining  the  whole  document,  we  ascertain  that  when 
the  deacon's  office  was  said  to  be  "  to  take  care  of  the 
poor,"  there  was  no  design  to  limit  it  to  that  only.  The 
London  divines,  in  the  work  from  which  we  have  quoted 
so  often,  employ  similar  phraseology.  They  say  frequently 
that  the  "deacon  takes  care  of  the  poor,"  and,  at  the  same 
time,  that  he  has  charge  "of  the  goods  of  the  church." 

Quest,  xxxi.  "  For  what  duty  were  they  (the  deacons)  appointed?  Ans. 
To  manage  the  temporal  affairs  of  the  church,  and  especially  to  attend 
to  the  wants  of  the  poor,  in  order  that  the  apostles  or  teachers  might 
give  themselves  continually  to  the  ministry  of  the  word." 

*  See  page  31,  for  the  whole  paragraph.  t  See  p.  32. 


(     39     ) 

This  apparent  inconsistency  is  susceptible  of  a  very 
easy  explanation.  They  speak  of  the  deacon  as  an  officer 
appointed  to  take  charge  of  the  poor,  in  the  same  way 
that  Presbyterians,  in  writing  and  in  conversation,  denomi- 
nate the  teaching-elder,  a  minister  of  the  gospel,  or  a 
"preacher."  The  reason  is  evident.  The  ministry  of  the 
word  is  the  great  business  of  this  class  of  ecclesiastical 
officers.  It  is  greater  than  administering  sacraments. 
Paul  says,  1  Cor.  i.  17:  "for  Christ  sent  me  not  to  baptize, 
but  to  preach  the  gospel."  In  fact,  there  is  no  direct 
assertion  of  the  pastor's  right  to  rule,  in  any  of  the  de- 
scriptive titles  usually  given  to  the  teaching  elder.  Would 
the  inference  be  a  just  one,  in  some  remote  period  when 
circumstances  had  altered,  that  Presbyterians  did  not  in 
the  19th  century  acknowledge  the  right  to  rule  as  belong- 
ing to  the  pastor,  because  they  do  not  commonly,  when 
speaking  of  him,  bring  to  view  this  part  of  his  official 
character?  Would  it  be  a  fair  inference  that  they  denied 
ruling  to  be  apart  of  the  pastor's  duties,  because  they  call 
him  the  teaching-elder  in  contrast,  apparently,  to  the  ruling- 
elder?  The  unsoundness  of  such  inferences  would  be 
shown  by  referring  to  other  portions  of  the  same  documents, 
in  which  ruling  is  affirmed  to  belong  to  the  pastor. 

In  this  way,  the  apparent  inconsistencies  alluded  to  are 
explained.  The  care  of  the  poor  is  a  very  important,  and  a 
primary  part,  of  the  functions  of  the  deacon.  Mainly,  per- 
haps, for  this  reason,  so  high  and  extensive  arange  of  qualifi- 
cations is  demanded  of  this  class  of  officers.  The  reform- 
ers, consequently,  spoke  of  the  deacon  repeatedly  in  terms 
that  have  given  rise,  in  the  present  circumstances  of  the 
churches,  (which  have  generally  dropped  the  office)  to  mis- 
taken notions  respecting  their  views  regarding  the  extent  of 
his  duties.  They  no  more  intended,when  they  referred  to  the 
deacon  as  appointed  to  the  charge  of  the  poor,  to  deny  that 
the  other  temporalities  of  the  church  were  to  be  under  his 
management,  than  Presbyterians  now  intend  to  deny  the 
ruling  powers  of  the  pastor,  when  they  speak  of  him  as  a 
"minister  of  the  gospel."  All  that  is  necessary  to  remove 
these  mistakes,  is  a  tolerable  acquaintance  with  the  history 
of  the  church,  and  a  competent  degree  of  familiarity  with 
the  modes  of  expression  in  use  in  times  somewhat  remote 
from  our  own.* 

*  The  writings  of  the  late  Dr.  M'Leod,  furnish  an  example  of  this  use 
of  language,  and  of  designations.  He  says,  in  his  Ecclesiastical  Cate- 
chism, repeatedly,  that  the  deacon  is  an  officer  "  to  take  care  of  the  poor." 
And  even  goes  so  far  as  to  say,  (how  properly  is  not  now  affirmed,)  that 


(     40     ) 

Here  the  argument  might  rest.  We  have  examined  the 
holy  oracles,  and  from  them  have  established  our  principle. 
We  have  traced  the  history  of  the  Christian  Church  by  a 
path  carried  through  her  purest  and  best  times,  and  por- 
tions, and  have  found  a  very  satisfactory  degree  of  una- 
nimity of  sentiment,  and  conformity  of  practice  on  the  sub- 
ject of  the  deacon's  office.  But  our  labours  are  not  at  an 
end,  for  the  deacon  has  not  only  been  excluded  in  more  mo- 
dern times,  from  the  position  assigned  to  him  in  the  house  of 
God,  by  Christ  her  head,  but  his  duties  divided,  and  sub- 
divided among  various  humanly  devised  substitutes,  or 
transferred  without  warrant,  to  other  ecclesiastical  officers. 
An  examination  of  this  branch  of  the  subject  occupies  the 
following  Chapter. 

CHAPTER  III. 

Of  Substitutes  for  the  Deacon. 

These  are  various.  In  some  instances,  the  teaching  and 
ruling  elders  perform  all  the  duties  of  the  deacon,  and  in 
others  a  part  of  them.  In  the  congregations  of  the  Scottish 
Establishment,  the  care  of  the  poor  is  devolved  generally 
upon  the  session;  while  the  remaining  functions  of  the 
deacon,  those  which  respect  the  maintenance  of  the  minis- 
try, and  the  charge  of  the  property  of  the  church,  are 
mostly  discharged  by  civil  functionaries.  In  the  Presby- 
terian congregations  of  Ireland,*  a  similar  arrangement 
subsists  for  the  care  of  the  poor;  while  the  other  offices  of 
the  deacon  are  performed,  so  far  as  they  are  attended  to  at 
all,  by  temporary  and  unordained  officers,  called  trustees, 
or  committee-men. 

This  is  the  mode  which,  more  than  any  other,  obtains 
in  the  churches  in  the  United  States.  In  very  few  con- 
gregations, comparatively,  is  the  office  of  the  deacon,  as  a 
distinct  institution  in  the  church,  known  at  all.  And 
where  the  name  is  common,  as  in  the  congregational 
churches  of  New  England,  it  is  employed  to  designate  an 
officer  resembling  much  more  the  scriptural  elder  than 
the  deacon. 

this  office  had  its  "  origin  in  the  existence  of  a  class  of  paupers  in  the 
Church."  Yet  this  distinguished  writer  held,  and  expressed  very  deci- 
dedly the  views  presented  in  this  chapter.  He  says,  p.  4G,  Ed.  1831, 
that  the  deacon  was  appointed  to  remove  the  burden  of  the  temporal  con-> 
cerns  from  the  minister,  and  elders,  when  it  becomes  embarrassing  to 
Mem."  And  in  Quest.  80:  "  Is  the  sole  right  of  managing  the  pecu- 
niary affairs  of  the  congregation  lodged  in  the  deacdnship?  To  this  he 
replies,  in  substance,  that  they  have  this  right,  as  the  "helps"  of  the  teach- 
ing and  ruling  elders. 

*  This  is  true,  (with  slight  modifications,)  both  of  the  Reformed  Pres- 
byterian Church,  and  the  Synod  of  Ulster. 


(     41     ) 

If  the  doctrines  advocated  in  this  essay  be  sound  and 
scriptural,  there  is  something  wrong  in  all  this.  If  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  has  instituted  a  distinct  office  for  the 
care  of  the  poor,  then  the  eldership  have  no  warrant  for 
taking  its  place,  so  as  to  exclude  the  instituted  office.*  If 
to  this  office  belongs  the  charge  of  all  the  contributions  of 
the  faithful,  then  the  substitution  of  trustees  or  committees 
for  this  purpose  must  be  still  more  unwarrantable.  All 
these  departures  from  the  scriptural  model,  and  the  foot- 
steps of  the  flock,  are  not,  however,  equally  reprehensible 
in  principle  or  dangerous  in  practice.  It  is  not  so  deci- 
dedly unscriptural  to  commit  the  whole  oversight  of  the 
poor  to  the  eldership,  as  to  constitute  boards  of  trustees 
for  the  administration  of  the  finances;  inasmuch  as  to  the 
elder  does  belong  in  a  certain  manner,  f  the  care  of  the 
poor,  while  the  scriptures  give  no  warrant  for  the  latter  at 
-all. 

It.  is  difficult  to  define  the  precise  position  and  character 
of  what  are  denominated  boards  of  trustees.  They  are  in 
the  church,  but  are  not  of  the  church.  They  have  under 
their  management  that  which  most  nearly  concerns  the 
interests  of  the  church;  and  yet,  as  officers,  the  church 
can  have  no  knowledge  of  them,  or  control  over  them.  They 
collect  and  disburse  the  contributions  of  the  church,  for 
the  support  of  her  ministry,  and  for  the  erection  and  re- 
pair of  her  places  of  worship ;  and  yet  they  are  not  the 
boards  of  the  church.  They  cannot  be  defined  ;  but  they 
can  be  shown  to  be  a  class  of  officers  not  warranted  either 
by  the  scriptures,  or  the  usages  of  the  best  churches. 

An  historical  fact,  which  has  an  important  bearing  upon 
this  subject,  should  be  attentively  considered,  and  remem- 
bered. It  is  this  :  The  deacon  and  the  trustee  have  never. 
for  any  considerable  time,  co-existed  in  any  denomination 
of  Christians.  Congregations  there  are,  indeed,  that,  for  a 
time,  have  had  both;  and  there  are  churches  in  which  some 
congregations  have  deacons,  and  others  trustees  perform- 
ing the  same  duties.  These  are  exceptions.  It  is  a  no- 
torious fact,  demanding  no  proof,  that  at  present  in 
churches  where  the  trustee  or  committee-man  has  Been 

s  The  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  at  its  last  meet- 
ing, enjoined  upon  all  their  congregations  to  elect  and  ordain  deacons. 
The  Associate  Presbyterian  Synod,  in  May  last,  reiterated  their  scriptural 
doctrines  respecting  deacons.  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  both  these  deno- 
minations will  complete  the  work  they  have  begun,  by  abolishing  the 
boards  of  trustees  in  their  churches. 

t  See  next  Chapter. 

5 


(    42    ) 

allowed  the  management  of  the  funds,  the  deacon  is  very 
rarely  found.  And  equally  notorious,  that  churches  which 
retain  the  deacon,  have  no  class  of  officers  corresponding  to 
the  trustee  or  committee-man.  For  example,  the  French 
and  Holland  churches.  The  reason  of  this  is  evident. 
Either  one  or  the  other  is  unnecessary.  An  active  board  of 
deacons  can  attend  to  all  the  fiscal  concerns  of  any  con- 
gregation :  an  active  board  of  trustees  would  find  deacons, 
in  the  end,  uncalled  for.  Moreover,  they  cannot  but  in- 
terfere with  each  other.  In  case  the  number  of  poor 
should  be  great,  requiring  for  their  sustenance  more  than 
the  collections  made  'particularly  for  their  use,  while  the 
ordinary  revenues  were  more  than  sufficient  to  meet  the 
other  current  expenses,  (a  frequent  occurrence)  what  is  to 
be  done?  The  trustees  could  not  transfer  the  surplus  to 
the  deacons  without  incurring  more  weighty  responsibili- 
ties than  they  would  often  be  willing  to  undertake;  while 
the  deacons  would  not  be  satisfied  to  knock  at  the  door 
of  the  trustees  for  the  funds  necessary  to  accomplish  their 
deeds  of  beneficence. 

But,  whatever  may  have  been  the  causes,  the  fact  is  as 
has  been  stated.  Consequently,  the  question  is  not  dea- 
cons and  trustees;  but  deacons  or  trustees:  Christ's  insti- 
tution, or  man's.  For  unless  the  operations  of  the  same 
causes  shall  be  entirely  changed  for  the  future,  we  shall 
never  see  both  these  classes  of  officers  actively  employed 
at  the  same  time,  in  the  Christian  church  to  any  very 
considerable  extent.     Let  us  enter  more  into  detail. 

I.   Boards  of  Trustees  are  an  Innovation* 

There  were  no  such  officers  in  the  churches  in  apos- 
tolic times.  There  were  no  officers  sustaining  such  a 
relation  to  the  church,  in  the  congregations  of  Geneva, 
France,  Holland,  and  Scotland  at  the  time  of  the  reforma- 
tion. Their  introduction  has  been  gradual;  but,  no  doubt, 
keeping  pace  with  the  downward  progress  in  doctrine  and 
godliness,  that  has  been  manifest  among  most  of  the  de- 
scendants of  the  reformers  \     There  is  great  difficulty  in 

•  By  "boards  of  trustees"  are  not  meant  those  boards,  which,  acting 
under  the  direction  of  the  ecclesiastical  judicatories  in  the  management 
of  church  funds,  such  as  those  appropriated  for  Theological  Seminaries, 
are  likewise  incorporated;  but  the  boards  of  congregations,  which  do  not 
sustain  any  ecclesiastical  character. 

t  This  remark  is  intended  to  refer  to  the  whole  period  since  the  refor- 
mation. Of  late  years,  frequent  and  successful  attempts  at  reformation 
have  been  made  in  some  denominations. 


(     43     ) 

ascertaining  at  what  time  regularly  organized  boards  of 
trustees  first  took  their  present  position  in  the  Protestant 
churches.  In  the  United  States,  they  were  probably 
formed  at  a  very  early  period.  It  is  certain  they  made  their 
first  appearance  in  cities,  where  most  corruptions  begin. 
Pride  and  worldliness  operate  more  powerfully  in  cities. 
There  is  a  class  of  men  to  be  found  in  most  city  congre- 
gations, that  is  (or  was)  almost  unknown  in  the  more  re- 
tired country  congregations.  Men  of  active  business 
habits,  industrious  and  influential;  but  who,  with  these 
characteristics  and  habits,  are  lacking  in  that  spirituality 
that  would  fit  them  to  undertake  a  sacred  office  by  solemn 
ordination.  They  may  make  very  good  trustees,  and 
it  may  be  thought  prudent  to  render  them  useful.  Or, 
there  are  men  who  do  not  even  make  a  profession  of  re- 
ligion, yet  they  are  rich,  and  possess  influence.  The 
trustee-ship  will  exactly  suit  them  :  it  forms  a  kind  of  neu- 
tral ground,  neither  belonging  to  the  world  nor  to  the 
church,  where  both  may  meet,  and  harmonize  pleasantly 
together. 

However  introduced,  boards  of  trustees  are  an  innova- 
tion. Like  other  human  contrivances,  originally  devised, 
perhaps,  with  the  professed  design  to  promote  the  good  of 
the  church,  by  furnishing  such  assistance  as  might  be 
thought  necessary  to  increase  the  efficiency  of  established 
gospel  institutions;  but  in  the  result,  either  excluding 
wholly,  or  materially  curtailing  and  changing  these  in- 
stitutions themselves.  As  the  singing  of  human  composi- 
tions in  celebrating  the  praises  of  God,  has  its  rise  in  small 
beginnings:  no  claim  is  at  first  offered  on  their  behalf 
to  the  sole  possession  of  this  part  of  God's  worship.  In 
the  end,  the  psalms  of  scripture  are  excluded,  and,  per- 
haps, even  reviled.  Singing  by  choir  begins  very  mo- 
destly: the  object  is  merely  to  improve  the  music.  In 
the  end,  the  choir  claims  to  be  the  seat  of  praise  in  the 
house  of  God.  Trustees  had  no  places  in  the  apostolic 
churches.  There  could  have  been  none  at  that  time.  The 
reformed  churches  had  no  such  officers.  Originally,  as 
there  is  reason  to  believe,  they  were  barely  tolerated,*  they 
are  now,  sometimes,  supported  as  altogether  preferable  to 
deacons;  and  some,  going  still  farther  like  the  advocates 
of  human  psalmody,  deny  the  office  of  deacon  to  be  at  all 
an  important  part  of  the  order  of  the  sanctuary.  Trustees, 
man's  invention,  they  would  not  dispense  with :  deacons, 
Christ s  appointment,  may  be  very  well  neglected !  The 
history  of  all  the  corruptions  we  have  mentioned  is  the 

*  They  are  tolerated  only,  in  most  churches,  still. 


(     44     ) 

same,  for  the  general  principle  will  always  hold  good :  a 
human  invention,  once  tolerated  in  the  church,  will  ultimate- 
ly exclude,  or  throw  into  the  shade  a  divine  institution.* 

II.  Boards  of  Trustees  are  unscriptural. 

The  authority,  or  even  the  permission,  of  the  Scriptures 
is  not  often  pleaded  in  behalf  of  trustees.t  The  argument 
in  their  defence  seems  generally  to  take  for  granted,  that, 
upon  this  system  alone,  can  all  the  rights  of  the  people 
be  properly  secured.  It  will  be  shown  in  the  sequel,  that 
the  directly  opposite  statement  is  true ;  but,  in  the  mean 
time,  we  remark  that  the  scriptural  order  does  by  no 
means  deprive  the  members  of  the  church  of  an  interest 
in  the  management  of  the  ecclesiastical  goods;  for  deacons 
are  chosen  by  the  people  and  are  the  representatives  of  the 
church;  not,  indeed,  the  agents  of  the  people.  And  here, 
it  ought  to  be  observed,  that  there  is  great  liability,  in  de- 
fending the  trustee  system,  to  employ  arguments  that  are 
inconsistent,  with  Presbyterianism ;  inasmuch  as  they  often 
proceed  upon  a  principle  which  assails  the  representative 
character  of  the  church's  government,  viz.,  that  to  com- 
mit the  management  of  the  temporalities  to  the  deacon,  is 
to  take  them  out  of  the  hands  of  the  church. 

This  evil,  however,  is  not  so  great  as  another  to  which 
we  now  refer.  Trustees'  having  no  scriptural  warrant, 
can  stand  upon  no  principle  that,  does  not  impugn  the  wis- 
do?n  or  the  goodness  of  the  church's  Head.  If  it  is  neces- 
sary for  human  wisdom  to  devise  a  system  of  pecuniary 
management  for  the  church,  then  it  follows  that  on  this 
point  her  arrangements  have  been  left  incomplete  by  her 
blessed  Head.  That  some  arrangements  are  absolutely 
necessary  for  fiscal  management,  in  all  Christian  congre- 
gations, no  sensible  man  will  think  of  denying.  In  the 
loose  manner  in  which  affairs  of  this  nature  are  often  left 
at  the  present  day,  the  persons  to  manage,  and  the  modes 

•   The  Papacy  furnishes  the  most  complete  example  of  this. 

t  The  only  attempt  ever  made,  perhaps,  to  gather  the  office  of  trustee 
from  the  Scriptures,  has  been  from  1  Cor.  xvi.  3,  2  ("or.  viii.  19,  and 
if.  may  he,  one  or  two  other  passages  of  the  same  tenor.  Besides  the 
difficulty  there  will  for  ever  be  in  establishing,  from  these  passages,  tin 
right  to  commission  any  but  a  deacon  to  convey  the  church's  contribu- 
tions to  Jerusalem,  there  are  two  others  -which  are  insuperable.  (1.)  It 
is  absurd  to  say  that  the  mere  carrying  of  funds  constitutes  cm  office,  and 
(2.)  which  is  still  more  fatal:  If  these  texts  prove  any  thing  on  the 
subject  at  all,  they  prove  too  much,  even  for  the  advocate  of  the  system 
ivc  oppose,  viz.:  that  the  people  have  a  right  to  appoint  trustees  jor  the 
poor's  fund,  and  thus  banish  deacons  altogether;  for  the  money  conveyed 
was  that  sent  to  the  saints  at  Jerusalem... 


(     45     ) 

of  management  may  not  be  very  distinctly  defined;  but 
in  the  most  loosely  constructed  congregation  some  method, 
either  understood  or  defined,  must  be  adopted  for  ma- 
naging fiscal  concerns.  In  the  apostolical  times,  (among 
pagans  and  pagan  institutions,)  the  circumstances  of  the 
church  were  not,  in  this  respect,  materially  different  from 
her  present  condition  in  nearly  all  countries.  Such  ar- 
rangements were  imperatively  necessary  then.  History 
shows  that  her  wants  have  at  all  times  been  nearly  the 
same.  It  is  her  duty  to  support  the  poor,  to  maintain  a 
ministry,  and  to  provide  a  place  of  worship.*  Has  the 
manner  of  doing  all  this  been  left  uncared  for  by  Jesus 
Christ,  except  one  portion,  that  regarding  the  poor,  which, 
however  important,  is  a  small  portion  compared  with  the 
whole?  It  has  always  been  argued  by  Presbyterians,  and 
with  great  and  acknowledged  force,  that  to  affirm,  as  some 
have  done,  that  the  Head  of  the  church  has  not  instituted 
any  government  for  her  regulation,  but  left  this  whole 
matter  to  be  arranged  according  to  circumstances,  is  to 
charge  the  King  of  Zion  either  with  ignorance  or  neglect; 
that,  as  a  government  is  necessary,  we  might  expect  to 
find  provision  on  this  subject  in  the  Scriptures.f  The  ar- 
gument applies  with  equal  weight  to  the  subject  we  are  now 
considering.  And  as  the  necessity  which  we  have  stated 
unquestionably  exists,^  we  may  expect  to  find  something 
in  reference  to  it,  in  the  record  of  the  institutions  establish- 
ed by  Jesus  Christ  in  the  church.  We  find  this  in  the 
deacon;  but  no  where  else.  If  the  deacon  is  not  the  offi- 
cer for  this  purpose,  then,  in  a  very  remarkable  manner, 
has  this  whole  matter  been  over-looked  by  the  church's 
Head.§  This  view  is  the  more  important,  as  it  puts  us 
in  the  proper  position  for  viewing  the  scriptural  argu- 
ments already  brought  forward  on  this  subject :  we 
should  expect  to  find  such  an  office  as  has  been  defined  in 
this  Essay. \\ 

*  Symington  (Dominion  of  Christ,  p.  53.)  puts  this  interrogatory: 
"  While  God  has  a  visible  church  in  the  world,  will  there  not  be  re- 
quired outward  erections  for  the  ordinances  of  worship,  and  temporal 
emoluments  for  the  support  of  its  ministers  and  institutions?" 

t  M-Leod's  Ecclesiastical  Catechism,  p.  44.  Ques.  72:  "That  which 
is  really  necessary,  Christ's  care  must  have  provided  for  his  church,  for 
he  distributes  different  gifts  to  profit  withal." 

X  The  great  variety  of  substitutes  for  the  deacon,  proves  this  suffi- 
ciently. 

§  What  then  becomes  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Westminster  Confession, 
Larger  Catechism,  Ques.  191,  that  the  church  should  be  "maintained 
by  the  civil  magistrate?" 

||  There  is  another  aspect  of  this  subject,  which  ought  not  to  be  left  out 

5* 


(     46     ) 

III.  Boards  of  Trustees  are  anii- Scriptural. 

This  involves  considerations,  in  some  respects,  more- 
serious  than  any  yet  presented.     It  involves  opposition  to 

of  view.  The  trustee  system  separates  the  funds  for  the  poor  from  the 
general  funds  of  the  congregation;  and  that  without  any  scriptural  war- 
rant. And  some  even  go  so  far  as  to  say,  that  the  ordinary  collections 
which  are  made  in  many  congregations,  on  the  Sabbath,  should  be  held 
sacred  for  this  use  alone. 

The  entire  silence  of  the  Scriptures  in  regard  to  any  such  distinct  fund, 
is  enough  to  set  this  opinion  aside.  Under  the  Old  Testament  dispen- 
sation, there  was,  unquestionably,  no  such  distinction  of  funds.  And 
as  to  collections  made  during  the  seasons  of  public  worship,  there  was 
an  explicit  law,  Deut.  xvi.  16,  17,  that  none  should  ever  "  appear  before 
the  Lord  empty,"  but  "every  man  as  he  was  able,  according  to  the 
blessing  of  his  God  upon  him,"  was  to  bring  to  the  public  treasury  at 
Jerusalem.  No  one  ever  imagined  this  to  refer  solely  to  collections  for 
the  poor.  It  was  this  which  was  "gathered  at  the  door  of  the  temple," 
in  Josiah's  reign,  and  applied  to  the  repair  of  the  temple,  2  Kings  xxii. 
4 — 6.  It  was  into  this  "  treasury,"  that  the  "  poor  widow  cast  her  two 
mites,"  Luke  xxi.  1 — 4.  In  the  reign  of  Joash,  2  Kings  xii.,  these  col- 
lections, taken  up  on  the  Sabbath,  as  well  as  the  other  days  of  the  feast, 
were  similarly  applied.  "  The  bag"  which  Judas  carried,  was  the  com- 
mon treasury,  for  three  years  and  a  half,  of  our  Lord  and  his  apostles. 
From  this  their  expenses  were  borne,  and  gilts  made  to  the  poor,  John 
xiii.  29.  The  apostle  Paul,  in  writing  to  the  Galatian  and  Corinthian 
churches,  merely  recalls  the  law  in  Dent.  xvi.  He  intimates  to  them 
that  the  most  proper  time  to  make  collections  for  the  church  at  Jerusa- 
lem, was  the  season  of  public  worship.  He  does  not  prescribe  that  all 
these  collections  should  be  applied  in  that  way:  he  does  not,  in  the 
least,  intimate  that  their  own  necessities,  as  a  church,  might  not  be  sup- 
plied out  of  these  gatherings.  Moreover,  these  collections,  when  sent 
to  Jerusalem,  would  there  be  improved  in  the  best  manner,  undoubtedly, 
for  promoting  the  good  of  the  church.  They  were  not  designed  solely 
to  feed  the  poor.  T'iey  were  sent  to  strengthen  a  feeble  church,  as  in 
our  times  is  often  done.  So  the  church  lias  always  explained  this  mat- 
ter. And  in  all  churches  Sabbath  collections  are  appropriated  to  various 
ecclesiastical  purposes.  Therefore,  there  can  be  no  distinct  fundi  from 
that  source  at  least,  for  the  use  of  the  poor.  And,  it  is  scarcely  possible 
lo  imagine  any  other  source  whence  a  distinct  fund  for  the  poor  can 
emanate. 

Sabbath  collections  for  pious  uses,  are  a  part  of  the  instituted  order  for 
public  worship.  Deut.  xvi.  10,  17.  1  Cor.  xvi.  2.  Da.  M'Lkod  has 
stated  the  doctrine  of  the  Bible,  in  reference  to]  this  subject,  with  great 
precision  and  perspicuity  in  his  Ecclesiastical  Catechism,  p.  83,  (ed. 
1831,)  in  answer  to  the  question  :  "  How  do  we  worship  Cod,  in  making 
collections  tor  the  saints?"  He  says,  "  Collection  is  to  be  made  for  the 
support  of  those  church  members,  who  arc  in  providence  incapacitated 
to  make  provision  for  themselves,  and  for  other  pious  purposes;  Chris- 
tians, in  so  doing,  worship  God  by  a  public  act,  which  testifies  their  de- 
pendence on  Christ  for  worldly  property,  and  their  willingness  to  use  it 
in  his  service,  contributing  on  the  Lord's  day,  according  to  the  need  of 
the  church,  in  proportion  to  their  weekly  prosperity." 

It  would  be  of  advantage,  in  more  than  one  respect,  to  the  church,  if 
this  part  of  worship  were  well  understood,  and  liberally  acted  upon. 


(     47     ) 

the  authority  of  the  church's  Head.  The  radical  prin- 
ciple of  the  trustee  system  is,  that  trustees  and  committees 
who  perform  similar  duties,  are  no  church  officers — do 
not  act  in  the  name  of  the  church's  Head — and  that  they 
are  the  mere  agents  of  the  people.  That  the  ecclesiastical 
goods;  (except  the  funds  for  the  support  of  the  poor)  name- 
ly, the  funds  invested  in  the  place  of  worship,  and  those 
which  go  to  the  maintenance  of  the  ministry,  and  other 
charges  attendant  upon  the  enjoyment  and  propagation  of 
the  gospel, "are  a  mere  joint  stock  concern,  and  differing 
from  the  property  invested  in  a  bank,  or  road,  only  in  the 
circumstance  that  the  revenue  anticipated  in  the  one  case 
consists  in  dollars,  in  the  other,,  in  religious  and  moral  im- 
provement. That  there  is  no  dedication  of  property  in 
the  one  case  more  than  in  the  other.  That  it  is  in  the 
power  of  the  contributor  to  manage  it  as  he  does  any  other 
part  of  his  property,  either  to  attend  to  it  himself,  or  to  ap- 
point one  or  more  persons  as  his  agents,  to  manage  it  for 
him. 

It  is  difficult,  indeed,  to  believe  that  any  devout  mind 
can  contemplate  without  revolting  at  it,  this  doctrine  as 
thus  stated  in  its  naked  deformity.  Yet  it  is  certainly  the 
fact,  that  this  statement  embraces  the  essential  principle 
of  the  trustee  system.  This  system  is  so  interwoven  with 
the  habits  of  an  age  which  knows  nothing  of  the  deacon, 
as  to  render  some  farther  notice  of  it  absolutely  neces- 
sary. 

The  true  doctrine  respecting  the  ecclesiastical  goods,  is 
directly  the  opposite  of  that  above  stated,  and  is  this:  that 
the  property  which  is  appropriated  to  ecclesiastical  pur- 
poses, is  dedicated  to  the  service  of  Christ,  as  the  church's 
Head.  And  is  to  be  managed  therefore,  under  his  autho- 
rity as  King  in  Zion,  by  officers  of  his  appointment.  There 
can  be  no  doubt,  for  it  is  so  said  expressly,*  that  the  con- 
tributions made  during  the  former  dispensation,  were  de- 
voted to  the  Lord,  and  therefore  could  not  be  re-called, 
except  they  were  replaced  by  an  equivalent  with  a  fifth 
part  of  the  assessed  value  added  to  it.  The  cities,  fields, 
and  revenues  of  the  priests  and  Levites  are  all  called  "the 
Lord's. "f  The  materials  employed  in  erecting  the  temple 
were  dedicated. t  Was  there  any  thing  typical  in  this? 
Was  there  any  thing  in  it  of  such  a  character  as  to  render 
it  inapplicable  now?  The  dedicated  things  were  em- 
ployed generally  for  the  same  purposes  in  all  respects,  for 

•  Lev.  xxvii.  13,  15,  19,  27,  31.  t  Lev.  xxvii.  30. 

X  1  Chron.  xxvi.  26,  27. 


(     48     ) 

which  the  ecclesiastical  property  is  now  used.  And  the 
most  acute  vision  may  be  challenged  to  discover  any  thing 
typical  in  the  devoting  of  the  houses,  &c,  of  the  Levites  and 
priests.  There  is  positive  evidence  that  this  was  not  a 
circumstance  peculiar  to  the  Old  Testament  economy. 
Paul  enforces  the  duty  of  furnishing  a  support  to  the  gos- 
pel ministry  by  referring  to  these  very  institutions;* 
while  in  the  case  of  Ananias  and  Sapphira  there  was 
both  lying  and  sacrilege. 

That  ecclesiastical  property  is  not  a  joint-stock-company 
concern,  but  something  ecclesiastical,  can  be  otherwise 
established.  It  cannot  be  sold  and  distributed  for  the  indi- 
vidual benefit  of  the  members  of  the  church,  or  the  peiv  hold- 
ers ;  nor  can  the  revenues  be  appropriated  to  the  private 
uses  of  the  members  of  the  congregation.  Nor,  in  case  of 
removal,  can  any  contributor  demand  an  assessment  to  re- 
ceive his  share.  And  when,  on  the  other  hand,  immi- 
grants attach  themselves  to  the  church,  or  individuals 
make  a  profession  of  religion  in  a  particular  church,  they 
become  entitled  to  the  benefits  of  the  church  property. 
Moreover,  the  poor  have  a  real  and  true  joint  interest  in 
the  ecclesiastical  goods,  as  well  as  the  rich.  This  the 
trustee  system  would  deny  them.t  There  is,  in  the  view  in 
which  we  are  now  looking  at  it,  an  analogy  to  state  pro- 
perty. The  commonwealth  is  a  moral  person,  and  is 
capable  of  holding  property,  and  deriving  benefit  from  it. 
It  belongs  to  no  one  individually,  and  all  the  citizens  of 
the  nation  have  an  interest  as  citizens  in  it.  So  of  town, 
county,  and  city  property.  The  church  is  a  moral  person : 
so  is  a  congregation,  a  presbytery,  and  a  synod.  They, 
therefore,  can,  and  do  hold  property,  when  lawfully  re- 
ceived, by  a  right  with  which  the  church  is  endowed  by 
her  Head.  This  is  property  dedicated.  It  is  set  apart  for 
ecclesiastical  purposes,  to  be  employed  in  promoting  the 
great  ends  of  her  organization  in  the  world.  -And  here 
we  have  the  reason  why  the  property  of  the  church  can- 
not be  sold  and  distributed  as  private  property.  It  belongs 
to  the  church  of  Christ.     In  other  words,  it  is  devoted  to 

*   ]  Cor.  ix. 

t  The  law  which  requires,  in  some  places  at  least,  a  year's  payment 
01  pew-rents,  before  the  liberty  is  allowed  of  voting  at  the  elections  for 
trustees,  and  which,  of  course,  excludes  the  poor  entirely  from  any  voice 
in  this  management  of  the  funds,  is  perfectly  consistent  with  this  anti- 
scriptural  system.  It  is  carrying  it  out  to  its  legitimate  and  sure  termi- 
nation. This  will  be  the  result,  certainly,  in  most  cases,  when  the 
system  has  existed  long  enough  among  any  people  to  show  its  genuine 
character. 


(     49     ) 

the  promotion  of  her  interests  and  ends,  so  long  as  it  can 
be  usefully  employed  in  this  way.* 

Now,  the  system  that  we  oppose  really  and  practically 
denies  all  this.  Denies  that  Christ  has  made  any  provision 
for  the  control  of  the  fiscal  interests  of  the  church,  denies  that 
the  church  has  any  right  to  receive  or  control  property;!  de- 
nies that  the  poor  in  the  church  have  all  the  rights  of  the 
rich.  The  connexion  between  the  trustee  system,  and 
the  erroneous  views  of  church  property  just  noticed,  is 
abundantly  evident.  If  the  property  set  apart  for  reli- 
gious-ends, is,  after  all,  mere  joint  stock  property,  then  it 
is  natural  enough  that  it  be  managed  just  as  a  bank,  or  a 
road  concern.  And,  on  the  other  hand,  if  funds  of  this 
kind  really  belong  to  the  congregation  as  a  part  of  the 
church,  and  are  ecclesiastical  property,  then  the  conclu- 
sion is  unavoidable;  the  management  of  them  should  be 
intrusted  to  officers  constituted  agreeably  to  the  will  of 
the  Head  of  the  church,  by  the  choice  of  the  people,  and 
by  ordination;  that  is,  to  deacons. 

IV.   Boards  of  Trustees  are  of  dangerous  tendency. 

As  they  are  ordinarily  constituted,  this  is  unquestion- 
able. In  many  congregations,  having  boards  of  trustees, 
individuals  are  chosen  to  that  office  who  are  not  even 
professors  of  religion,  and  whose  recommendations  are 

*  In  the  xxxviii.  Note  to  M'Crie's  Life  of  Knox,  there  are  some  brief, 
but  interesting  notices  of  opinions  of  the  Scottish  ministers  on  the  sub- 
ject of  the  property  of  the  church.  This  author  says,  that  they  held 
that  "property,  which  had  been  set  apart,  and  given  for  religious  uses, 
could  not  justly,  or,  without  sacrilege,  be  alienated,  as  long  as  it  was 
needed  for  those  purposes."  An  extract  is  given  in  this  note  from 
Sermons  against  Sacrilege,  by  Robert  Pont,  a  son-in-law  of  John  Knox, 
and  a  very  distinguished  divine.  They  were  written  by  the  appoint- 
ment of  the  General  Assembly,  in  the  year  1591.  He  replies  to  the 
objection,  that  the  Levitical  law  is  abrogated,  and  that,  therefore,  autho- 
rities from  the  Old  Testament  are  of  no  force  now,  as  follows:  "I  an- 
swer concerning  those  lands,  or  annual  rents  out  of  lands  delated  and 
given  to  the  Kirk,  that  although  the  Levitical  law,  with  the  ceremonies 
thereof,  concerning  the  outward  observation  hath  taken  an  end,  and  is 
fulfilled  in  Christ,  yet  the  substance  of  the  policy,  concerning  entertain- 
ment of  the  service  of  God,  and  uphold  of  religion,  still  remains.  And 
it  is  no  less  necessary,  that  the  ministry  of  God  among  us  be  maintained : 
and  that  sufficient  provision  be  made  to  secure  other  godly  uses,  &c. 
&c."  Again,  Pont  says,  "albeit  in  their  own  nature  they  be  like  other 
earthly  possessions ;  yet  in  so  far  as  they  are  applied  to  an  holy  use, 
they  may  well  be  called  holy  possessions  and  rents,  as  the  kirk  is  holy,, 
to  whose  use  they  are  appointed." 

t  Carry  this  out,  and  what  becomes  of  Theological  Seminaries,  Li-. 
braries,  Mission  Boards,  &c.  &c.  ? 


(     50     ) 

solely  of  a  worldly  character.  It  is  manifest  that  a  board, 
thus  constituted,  either  in  whole  or  in  part,  must  have 
ultimately  an  injurious  influence  upon  the  cause  of  truth 
and  vital  religion.  Leaving  out  of  view  altogether,  the 
direct  and  powerful  temptation  to  trim  and  accommodate, 
which  must  beset  the  ministry  in  congregations  whose 
fiscal  concerns  are  all  under  such  management,  this  hurt- 
ful influence  will  be  felt  in  other  ways.  The  sacredness 
of  the  ministerial  office  will  be  affected.  The  pastor  will 
be  in  danger  of  degenerating  into  a  mere  temporary  hire- 
ling, and  his  support  not  considered  as  a  religious  duty, 
any  further  than  it  is  incumbent  to  pay  a  hireling  his 
wages.* 

*  This  result  has  been  already  developed  to  a  lamentable  extent.  It 
has  become  common,  in  some  denominations  of  Christians,  for  clergy- 
men to  hire  themselves  out,  to  congregations,  to  preach  for  six  months, 
nine  months,  a  year,  &c. !  To  make  bargains,  previously  to  receiving  a  call 
where  the  pastoral  relation  is  constituted,  which  by  the  old  laws  of  the 
Reformation  was  a  censurable  offence,  is  an  every  day  matter.  To 
such  an  extent  has  this  evil  gone,  that  of  about  thirteen  hundred  ministers 
belonging  to  the  General  Assembly  Presbyterian  Church,  (Old  School), 
four  hundred  and  eighty-one  are  stated  supplies,  or  more  than  one-third; 
while,  in  some  instances,  nearly  whole  Presbyteries  have  been  mere 
stated  supplies.  The  views  of  a  writer  in  the  "Presbyterian,"  one  of 
the  organs  of  the  Old  School  General  Assembly,  are  remarkably  correct 
on  this  point.  Some  of  them  are  quoted,  contained  in  that  paper  of 
June  6,  1840.  After  stating  that  "there  was  no  such  thing  as  a 
church  and  congregation  associated  together,  in  the  apostolic  age,  in  the 
support  of  divine  institutions,"  he  goes  on  to  say:  "  It  is  far  otherwise  now. 
Not  only  are  there  regular  congregations  associated  with  every  church, 
but  in  our  own,  and  many  other  countries,  legal  provision  is  made  to 
collect  and  disburse  the  temporalities  of  the  whole  united  concern. 
Hence,  there  are  now  legal  officers,  styled  trustees,  to  perform  those 
very  duties  which  once  lay  exclusively  on  the  church  cr/o/ic."  "  I  am 
constrained  to  say,  that  it  is  very  questionable,  whether  it  has  not  pro- 
duced, or,  at  least,  increased  one  of  the  most  serious  evils  which  the 
church  has  to  contend  with  in  the  present  day.  In  many  parts  of  the 
church,  the  frequent  failure  of  ministerial  support,  is  constantly  separa- 
ting pastors  and  churches,  thus  blighting  the  labours  of  numerous  years, 
and  condemning  the  churches  to  long  and  cheerless  seasons  of  silence 
and  desolation.  It  is  worthy  of  serious  inquiry,  whether  the  commit- 
ment of  the  support  of -the  Gospel  to  a  number  of  men  who  do  not,  as  a 
board,  feel  that  they  are  acting  under  the  solemn  responsibilities  of  re- 
ligion, and  the  obligations  of  church  officers;  whether  their  duties  would 
not  be  more  faithfully  performed,  if  they  were  committed  to  men  who 
felt  that  they  are  "  ordained  of  God,"  for  this,  as  well  as  other  import- 
ant services,  and  that  they  have  vowed  before  heaven  and  earth  to  be 
faithful  to  their  trust?  And  would  not  the  church  itself  be  more  likely 
to  be  kept  awake  to  the  important  subject  of  ministerial  support,  if  faith- 
fully urged  to  it  by  the  officers  whom  they  had  chosen  for  this  self-same 
service?" 

It  is  to  be  hoped  that  not  a  few  in  that  body  begin  to  reflect  upon  that 
very  remarkable  arrangement,  by  which  a  "  church,"  a  body  of  Chris- 


(     51     ) 

The  example  of  many  of  the  most  prominent  men  in 
the  congregation,  on  the  side  of  irreligion,  must  have  a 
tendency  to  prevent  accessions  to  the  church.  Nearly  as 
high  privileges  of  honour  and  influence  as  the  church  has 
to  bestow,  can  be  enjoyed  by  worldly  men.  Such  men 
occupy  a  station  hardly  inferior  in  prominence  and  power 
to  that  of  the  eldership.  Cannot  the  fewness  of  male 
members  in  many  churches,  where  the  appearances  of 
prosperity  are  otherwise  great,  be  traceable  in  part  to  this 
cause?* 

Such  a  board  has  the  pecuniary  support  of  the  pastor 
in  their  power,  and  that  without  redress.  Should  the 
pastor,  by  faithful  preaching,  or  discipline,  offend  the 
trustees,  he  has  no  protection  from  that  kind  of  vengeance 
which  they  might  attempt  to  inflict  upon  him,  except 
such  as  the  civil  law  affords,  f 

But  were  it  so  that  none  of  these  evil  effects,  which 
have  been  specified,  should  result  from  the  system  of 
trustees,  the  silent  and  gradually  operating  influence 
which  such  a  commingling  of  the  world  and  the  church 
has  had  upon  the  churches,  and  must  necessarily  have, 
would  of  itself  be  sufficient  to  excite  the  alarm  of  pious 
and  thinking  men.  What,  for  example,  would  be  thought 
of  a  system  which  would  place  the  funds  collected  for 
missionary  and  education  purposes,  or  the  funds  of  the 
theological  seminaries  of  the  churches,  under  the  control, 
irresponsible  to  the  authorities  of  the  church,  of  worldly 
men,  or  even  of  men  wanting  an  ecclesiastical  character, 
although  church  members?  Every  one  knows  the  long 
and  vehement  conflict  waged  on  this  very  subject  in  the 
General  Assembly,  before  the  division  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church.     That  whole  controversy  was,  in  fact,  upon  the 

tians,  and  a  "congregation,"  a  part  of  the  world,  thus  intermingle  and 
entwine  themselves  together. 

*  The  paucity  of  male  members  in  the  churches  of  some  of  the  larger 
denominations,  is  notorious.  It  was  stated  on  the  floor  of  the  General 
Assembly  in  May,  1840,  that  there  are  many  churches  in  connexion 
with  that  body,  especially  in  the  South,  which  have  not  materials  enough 
to  make  ruling-elders  of,  to  say  nothing  of  deacons.  Yet  they  have  their 
boards  of  trustees. 

t  This  is  no  supposition.  In  one  instance,  in  the  city  of  Philadelphia, 
the  salary  of  a  minister  was  withheld  by  the  board  of  trustees  for  nearly, 
or  quite,  two  years.  They  had  secured  a  majority  through  the  opera- 
tion of  the  principle  that  holding  a  pew  entitles  to  vote  for  trustees,  and 
by  excluding,  upon  various  pretexts,  many  members  in  full  communion. 
Their  purpose  was,  avowedly,  to  starve  him  out,  because  of  his  faithful 
reproof  of  Sabbath  violation,  intemperance,  the  traffic  in  liquors,  &c. 
The  writer  has  more  than  once  heard  clergymen  regretting  difficulties 
which  attended  their  ministry,  arising  from  this  source. 


(     52     ) 

question  whether  the  funds  devoted  to  the  maintenance 
and  diffusion  of  the  Gospel,  should  be  managed  upon  the 
principle  and  according  to  the  mode  of  the  trustee  system, 
or  upon  the  principle  and  according  to  the  mode  prescribed 
in  the  Scriptures. 

Those  who  have  not  reflected  upon  this  subject,  may 
suppose  that  all  these  apprehended  dangers  can  be  easily 
avoided,  by  restricting  the  elective  franchise  to  church 
members  in  full  communion,  or,  at  least,  by  limiting  elec- 
tors to  such  persons  in  the  choice  of  trustees.  But  is  such 
a  restriction  generally  made,  or  can  it  be  expected  as  a 
general  rule?  The  pressing  temptation  to  increase  the 
funds  and  augment  the  resources  of  the  congregation,  may 
be  expected  to  prevail  over  the  feeble  anticipations  of  evil 
from  such  a  course,  and  to  terminate,  as  has  commonly 
been  the  case  heretofore,  in  choosing  non-professors  as 
trustees.  Nor  is  such  a  result  to  be  anticipated  only  in 
the  larger  denominations.  Not  many  years  ago,  when  a 
city  congregation,  in  connexion  with  the  Reformed  Pres- 
byterian Church,  were  arranging  their  mode  of  fiscal  ope- 
rations, the  question  whether  pew-holders,  not  being  mem- 
bers, should  have  a  vote  in  the  choice  of  trustees,  was 
warmly  argued;  and  although,  in  that  instance,  it  was 
decided  in  the  negative,  the  majority  was  very  small.  Had 
the  decision  been  different,  there  was  no  redress  upon  the 
doctrine  of  the  trustee  system.  Nor,  upon  this  system, 
can  any  judicatory  of  the  church  ever  undertake  to  decide 
the  question,  by  enacting,  by  law,  any  such  restriction:  it 
must,  be  left  to  congregations  themselves.*  This  presents 
the  subject  in  another  aspect.  Have  congregations,  upon 
the  principle  supposed,  the  right  to  make  this  restriction? 
Let  us  examine  this  point  a  little. 

Suppose  a  congregation  is  making  pecuniary  arrange- 
ments: they  meet,  and  subscriptions  are  given  in  by  some 
persons  who  are  church  members,  and  also  by  others,  who 
are  not.  What  right  have  the  church  members,  if  the 
trustees  are  mere  money  agents,  to  take  the  appointment 
of  them  to  themselves?  Mark:  the  right  of  appointing 
trustees  is  supposed  to  be  derived,  not  from  citizenship 
in  the  church,  and  a  consequent  right,  to  have  a  voice  in 
managing  the  ecclesiaslical  funds,  but  from  the  fact  of 
having  invested  mone}^  in  the  funds  of  a  joint  stock  con- 

*  In  another  instance,  in  the  same  denomination,  individuals,  not 
members,  of  that  church,  and  some  not  professors  of  religion,  were 
chosen  trustees,  and  for  some  time  managed  the  funds.  In  the  result, 
the  members  of  the  church  in  that  congregation, lost  the  whole  property. 


(     53     ) 

€ern.  All  have  this  qualification  alike,  (which  is  the  only 
one  known  to  the  trustee  system,)  and  yet  one  part  take 
upon  themselves  to  exclude  the  other  from  the  manage- 
ment of  their  own  funds;  for  they  are  supposed  still  to  be 
theirs.  It  is  true,  the  church  members  might  refuse  to 
receive  subscriptions  from  any  but  themselves,  or  to  let  a 
pew  to  any  other;  but,  as  this  is  so  improbable,  we  may 
leave  it  out  of  view  altogether.  It  is  not  even  supposahle 
that  churches  will  refuse  to  rent  pews  to  non-professors. 
It  would  be  too  great  an  absurdity.  And  yet,  if  they  do 
so,  we  repeat,  they  have  no  right,  upon  any  other  princi- 
ple than  that  which  we  advocate,  to  exclude  them  from 
the  management  of  the  fiscal  concerns. 

To  return  to  the  proposition  with  which  we  set  out : 
the  trustee  system  is  of  evil  tendency.  This  point  may  be 
still  further  illustrated  by  the  laws  and  doings  of  nations. 
Nations  derive  a  revenue,  in  many  ways,  from  foreigners; 
yet  they  do  not,  on  that  account,  allow  foreigners  a  vote, 
even  for  officers  who  manage  the  revenue.  The  revenues 
are  national  property.  The  right  to  a  voice  in  manao-in^ 
them  is,  consequently,  a  privilege  of  citizenship.  No 
other  doctrine  would  be  listened  to  for  a  moment  in  the 
commonwealth.  National  security  against  foreign  influ- 
ence requires  them  to  pursue  this  course.  And  should 
nations  be  more  jealous  of  the  intrusion  of  foreigners,  than 
the  church  of  God?  Ought  they  to  guard  against  the 
evils  that  might  result  from  the  control  of  their  revenues, 
by  men  who  are  not  bound  by  the  ties  of  citizenship  to 
the  body  politic;  and  should  the  church  of  Jesus  Christ 
commit  her  revenues  to  those  who  are  not  citizens  of 
this  commonwealth  of  Israel,  and  thus  expose  herself  to 
evils,  against  which  the  world  adopts  so  many  precautions? 
Truly,  "the  children  of  this  world  are,  oftentimes,  wiser 
in  their  generation  than  the  children  of  light!'' 

V.  Boards  of  Trustees  are  not,  as  Depositaries  of  Church 
Property,  so  safe  as  Beacons. 

And  that  because  they  are,  comparatively,  irresponsible. 
Trustees  are  not,  indeed,  without  responsibility  to  the  laws 
of  the  land  :*  and  provided  they  are  church  members,  they 
are  individually  accountable  to  the  courts  of  the  church,  for 
immoral  or  scandalous  conduct.  But  they  have  no'respon- 
sibility  as  trustees  to  any  ecclesiastical  tribunal,  as  deacons 
have. 

*  Deacons  are  also  responsible  to  the  laws. 


(     54     ) 

Are  they  responsible  to  the  congregation?  Not  at  all. 
It  is  true  they  may  be  superseded  at  the  termination  of 
the  period  for  which  they  were  chosen,  by  another  set  of 
trustees;  but,  in  the  mean  time,  none  of  their  acts,  however 
deeply  injurious  to  the  interests  of  the  congregation,  can 
be  remedied  except  by  an  expensive  process  at  law.  They 
may  close  the  church  doors  against  the  minister  and  con- 
gregation; they  may  refuse  to  pay  the  pastor's  salary, 
they  may  neglect  to  pay  other  dues,  and  in  some  of  the 
United  States*  they  may  dispose  of  the  entire  property  of 
the  church.  For  such  breaches  of  trust  there  is,  indeed, 
a  remedy  by  the  courts  of  law;  but  what  this  is  worth,  in 
most  instances,  they  know  best  who  have  tried  it.  When 
their  term  expires  they  may  be  voted  out  of  office,  but 
this  does  not  furnish  a  remedy  for  past  evils.  And, 
moreover,  their  successors  go  into  office  equally  unincum- 
bered, and  irresponsible.  Their  responsibility  is  there- 
fore, practically,  little  better  than  nominal. 

It  is  different  with  the  deacon.  Heisequally  responsible  to 
the  laws  of  the  land  with  the  trustee,  for  the  law  views  him 
as  such;  and  besides,  he  is  responsible  to  the  courts  of  the 
church.  These  courts  can  order  the  board  of  deacons  to 
reverse  their  acts  of  malversation,  and  mal-adrninistration. 
In  the  first  instance  they  are  chosen  with  care  by  the 
members  of  the  congregation  in  regular  standing  as 
church  members;  the)'  are  then  ordained  in  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ;  and,  then,  besides  their  accountability  to 
the  courts  of  law,  they  are  responsible  to  the  ecclesias- 
tical authorities.  So  that,  considered  merely  as  fur- 
nishing satisfactory  guarantees  for  the  just  and  faithful 
administration  of  the  church's  finances,  Christ's  institu- 
tion will  be  found  far  superior  to  the  contrivances  of  men.f 

A  system  so  highly  objectionable,  and  so  extremely  lia- 
ble to  abuses,  ought  not  to  be  permitted  to  continue  in 
operation  in  any  congregation;  not  even  in  those  where  it 
may  still  be  in  its  infancy,:}:  and  has  not  yet  assumed  its 
more  objectionable  features.  And  particularly  when  it 
rests,  as  it  always  does,  at  least  in  part,  upon  the  ruins  of 
the  deacon's  office.  Let  congregations  do  their  duty  on 
this  subject,  and  their  own  experience  will  satisfy  them  that 
Christ's  arrangements  are  better  than  man's. 

*  New  York,  for  example. 

t  For  some  observations  upon  the  "  Title  to  Church  Property,"  see 
Note  C.  # 

J  As  in  those  congregations  which  manage  their  funds  by  temporary 
committees,  chosen  in  various  ways  from  among-  themselves,  us  emer 
gencies  occur,  and  which  are  not  permanent  boards. 


(    55    ) 


CHAPTER  IV. 

Of  the  Relations  of  the  Deacon  to  the  other  Ecclesiastical  Officers,  and 
,       to  the  Courts  of  the  Church. 

The  deacon  cannot  be  an  independent  officer.     To  sup- 
pose that  when  ordained  he  becomes  a  separate  and  iso- 
lated portion  of  the  church's  organization,  would  be  an 
anomaly  in   social  arrangements,  and  inconsistent  with 
the  fundamental  principles  of  presbyterian   church   go- 
vernment.    The  fact  that  the  deacon  is  ordained  does,  of 
itself,  show  that  after  ordination  he  is  not  independent  in 
the  administration  of  his  office.     As  a  rite,  ordination  is 
not  only  the  instituted  mode  of  imparting  office-power,  it 
likewise  contains  a  very  direct  intimation  of  the  subordi- 
nation of  its  subject,  in  his  official  acts,  to  the  spiritual 
authority  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  to  this,  moreover,  as  exer- 
cised in  the  constituted  courts  of  the  church.     No  one 
therefore  supposes  it  possible  for  a  minister  or  a  ruling 
$der  to  become  independent  in  his  official  character,  of 
the  government  of  the  church  in  which  he  is  ordained  to 
office :  nor  does  the  deacon.     However,  as  this  part  of  the 
subject  is  more  liable  to  be  enveloped  in  doubt,  or  ob- 
scured by  prejudice,  than  any  other,  it  is  necessary  to  ex- 
amine with  some  minuteness  and  care,  the  relations  of 
the  deacon  to  the  government  established  in  the  Christian 
Church.     This  will  be  done  from  the  Scriptures,  from 
the  footsteps  of  the  flock,  and  from  the  rules  of  prudence 
and  wisdom,  as  these  are  illustrated  in  the  various  de- 
partments of  the  social  organization. 

I.   The  Scriptures  exhibit  the  Deacon  as  subordinate  to  the 
Courts  of  the  Church,  in  the  Discharge  of  his  Functions. 

The  circumstance  of  the  ordination  of  the  seven,*  as  has 
been  observed,  fully  establishes  this  statement.  The  twelve 
say  to  the  multitude,  verse  3;  "Look  ye  out  among  you 
seven  men,  &c.  whom  we  may  appoint  over  this  busi- 
ness." They  give  no  intimation  that  they  were  about  to 
institute  an  independent  order  of  officers;  but  in  the  very 
act  of  directing  their  election,  the  apostles  claim  the  ap- 
pointment as  belonging  to  themselves.  If  the  apostles  had 
no  concern  in  the  "business,"  and  were  to  have  none, 
could  such  a  course  have  been  pursued?  As  plainly  as 
actions  can  speak,  do  they  show,  in  this  instance,  that  the 

*  Acts  vj,  l-™6. 


(     56     ) 

deacons  were  to  be  responsible  to  the  apostles.  In  the  narra- 
tion of  the  events  of  the  following  thirty  or  forty  years,  con- 
tained in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  in  the  Epistles,  there 
are  frequent  and  decisive  proofs  that  the  duties  for  which  the 
deacons  were  ordained  as  their  special  charge,  might  still  be, 
and  often  were,  performed  by  the  apostles  and  elders.  Paul 
says,  that  the  apostles  with  whom  he  conversed  in  the 
city  of  Jerusalem,  upon  his  return  from  Arabia,  about 
three  years  after  the  ordination  of  the  seven,  "would  only 
that  we  should  remember  the  poor;  the  same  which  I 
also  was  forward  to  do."*  This  distinguished  apostle 
was  very  active  daring  his  whole  ministry,  not  only  in 
giving  directions,  as  he  did  to  the  Galatian  and  Corinthian 
churches,!  respecting  the  poor  and  the  maintenance  of 
gospel  ordinances,  but  likewise  in  actually  ministering  at 
times  to  the  wants  of  the  poor  saints.  His  last  visit  to 
Jerusalem  was  for  the  express  purpose  of  bringing  alms 
^to  his  nation  and  offerings.  J  These  he  brought,  not  by 
a  commission  received  from  the  people,  but  as  an  official 
duty.$  And  in  another  instance,  we  find  the  contri- 
butions sent  to  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  directed,  not  to  the 
bodv  of  the  people,  nor  even  to  the  deacons,  but  to  "  the 
elders"  \\ 

*  Gal.  ii.  10. 

t  1  Cor.  xvi.  2  Cor.  ix.  The  deacons  must  have  been  addressed  in; 
these  instances,  in  their  official  character,  as  well  as  private  church 
members. 

X  Acts  xxiv.  17. 

§  1  Cor.  xvi.  3,  4.  "  And  when  I  come,  whomsoever  ye  shall  ap- 
prove by  your  letters,  them  will  I  send  to  bring  your  liberality  unto  Je- 
rusalem. And  if  it  be  meet  that  I  go  also,  they  shall  go  with  me."  In 
this  passage,  Paul  seems  to  speak  of  the  sending  of  those  whom  the 
Corinthians  might  "approve,"  to  Jerusalem,  as  his  act:  that  he  would 
give  them  the  appointment.  The  mere  carrying  of  funds,  as  has  been 
remarked  above,  does  not  constitute  an  officer;  but  when  Paul,  suo  ?notu, 
by  his  own  act,  takes  this  business  upon  himself,  asking  for  no  fresh  ap- 
pointment by  the  people,  it  is  plain  he  thought  himself  competent  to  do 
it,  as  a  minister  of  Christ.  Moreover,  it  is  worthy  of  notice  that  this 
appears  to  have  been  the  way  in  which  such  contributions  were  com- 
monly sent.  Long  before,  Paul  and  Barnabas  had  borne  to  Jerusalem 
the  contributions  of  the  church  of  Antioch.  Acts  xi.  30. 

H  Acts  xi.  30.  Most  judicious  commentators  and  critics,  have  deduced 
the  same  inference  that  we  have,  from  this  text.  The  Westminster  As- 
sembly directs  us  to  this  text,  as  proving  thai  to  the  pastor  and  elders 
belongs  the  care  of  the  poor.  The  London  Divines  say,  (Church  Go- 
vernment, page  184,)  "The  disposing  ami  appointing  how  it  (the  alms) 
shall  be  best  improved  and  disposed  of  cannot  be  denied  to  be  an  act  of 
government,  and  for  this  did  the  ciders  meet  together,  Acts  xi.  80."  Dr. 
M'Leod,  Eccles.  Catechism,  ed.  1831,  page  130,  "a//  collections  were 
delivered  into  the  hands  of  the  apostles  and  elders,  the  presbytery,  Acts. 
xi.  30." 


(     57     ) 

These  facts  establish,  beyond  all  reasonable  doubt,  the 
position   above  stated.      Because,   if  the   oversight   and 
charge  of  those  very  things,  which  have  been  specially 
committed  to  the  deacon,  are  still,  in  any  way,  incumbent 
upon  the  spiritual  officers  of  the  church,  then  is  not  the 
deacon  the  sole,  nor  an  independent  officer,  in  performing 
his  functions.      It  may,  perhaps,  be  supposed  by  some 
that  this  doctrine  is  true,  so  far  as  it  is  applicable  to  the 
case  of  the  poor;  but  that  it  does  not  hold  respecting  the 
other  functions  of  the  deacon's  office.     If  we  remember, 
however,  that  the  whole  revenues,  (as  has  been  attempted, 
at  least,  to  be  shown  in  the  second  chapter  of  this  Essay,) 
were  originally  managed  by  the  apostles;  and  that  they 
made  the  same  kind  of  transfer  of  the  whole  of  "the  daily 
ministration,"  as  of  any  part  of  it,  at  the  ordination  of  the 
deacons :  and  then  connect  with  these  established  truths 
the  fact  just  now  ascertained,  namely,  that  the  care  of 
the  poor,  at  least  as  to  the  general  charge  and  supervision, 
still  belonged  to  the  apostles,  we  infer  as  the  only  con- 
clusion from  these  premises,  that  the  general  charge  and 
supervision  of  the  whole  temporalities  still  rested  upon 
them.     If  the  apostles  did  not  divest  themselves  of  all  re- 
sponsibility in  regard  to  the  poor,  (and  this  is  universally 
admitted,)  neither  did  they  in  regard  to  the  other  interests 
of  the  church,  that  were  specially  intrusted  to  the  deacon ; 
for  the  very  identical  language  which  informs  us  of  the 
one,  informs  us  of  the  other.     There  is  not  even  a  hint, 
that  two  funds  were  afterwards  to  be  formed  instead  of 
the  one  which  had  previously  existed.     Indeed,  there  is 
no  scriptural  authority  whatever,  for  separating  the  funds 
appropriated  to  the  use  of  the  poor  in  the  Christian  church, 
from  those  destined  to  other  uses.*     The  idea,  then,  of 
joint  charge  in  the  case  of  the  former,  and  independency 
on  the  part  of  the  deacon  with  regard  to  the  latter,  has 
no  scriptural  foundation  to  rest  upon,  for  the  Scriptures 
recognise  no  such  distinction  of  funds.     Consequently,  if 
the  other  officers  of  the  church  have  no  oversight  of  the 
temporalities  generally,  they  can  have  no  other  charge  of 
the  interests  of  the  poor,  than  that  which  rests  upon  all 
the  faithful:   they  have  none  in  their  official  character. 
This  is  a  conclusion  that  few  would  admit;   if  not  ad- 
mitted, the  proposition  which  we  have  laid  down  contains 
the  only  true  and  scriptural  view  of  the  subject. 

The  statement  contained  in  Acts  vi.  4,  may  be  deemed 
opposed  to  these  views.     The  apostles  say  that  they  would 

*  See  p.  46,  foot-note. 
6* 


(     58     ) 

'give  themselves  continually  to  prayer,  and  to  the  minis- 
try of  the  word."  To  those  who  may  consider  this  text 
as  containing  an  express  relinquishment  of  all  charge  over 
the  church's  temporalities,  we  might  reply  by  employ- 
ing the  argumentum  ad  hominem;  for  they,  probably,  in 
most  instances,  likewise  entertain  the  idea,  that  "this 
business,"  verse  3,  signifies  only  the  care  of  the  poor. 
If  the  deacon  is  ah  officer  to  attend  solely  to  the  poor, 
and  the  apostles  relinquish  entirely,  in  verse  4,  all  con- 
cern in  that  which  they  transfer  to  the  deacons,  what 
then  becomes  of  the  universally  admitted,  and  certainly 
scriptural  doctrine,  that  the  apostles  were  still  charged 
with  the  care  of  the  poor?  According  to  the  objection,  they 
conveyed  all  this  to  the  deacon  !  This  text  cannot  there- 
fore, upon  any  view  of  the  deacon's  office,  be  supposed  to 
contain  an  entire  abandonment,  upon  the  part  of  the  apos- 
tles, of  all  the  fiscal  duties  which  they  had  heretofore  per- 
formed.    How  is  it  to  be  explained? 

The  word,  nfo<5xa?-tt?ov^v,  (for  it  is  in  the  original  but  one 
word,)  translated,  "wiU  give  ourselves  continually  to"  is 
used  eight  times  in  the  New  Testament;*  and  in  every 
instance,  but  two,  it  refers  to  the  performance  of  religious 
duties,  such  as  prayer  and  partaking  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 
It  is  compounded  of  *p°s.  with,  and  *paros,  strength;  and 
means,  as  its  roots  import,  vigorous  and  persevering  atten- 
tion, but  not  exclusive  attention.  Stockius  translates  it, 
"semper  alteri  proesto  esse,"  to  be  always  in  readiness  for 
another'1  s  service.  In  none  of  those  texts  where  it  refers 
to  devotional  duties!  can  it  mean  exclusive  attention;  for 
the  Christian  has  many  duties  to  perform  besides  acts  of 
worship:  but  he  is  so  to  engage  in  them,  as  "always  to 
be  in  readiness  for"  God's  service:  he  must  not  become 
entangled  with  natural  and  civil  duties,  so  as  to  be  incum- 
bered and  hindered  in  his  devotions.  This  is  finely  ex- 
pressed by  this  word.  The  use  made  of  the  same  word 
in  Acts  x.  7,  throws  much  light  upon  its  meaning.  Cor- 
nelius, the  centurion,  sent  for  Peter,  "ofpcHruarip  ev«&j  *m 
rtpojxoprfpowrw  auT-<V  a  devout  soldier  of  them  that  waited  on 
him  continually.  Now,  this  soldier  was  not  merely  the 
attendant  of  Cornelius:  he  was  still  a  soldier.  In  the 
mean  time,  however,  he  was  released  from  the  most  bur- 
densome part  of  his  military  duties,  that  he  might  "al- 
ways be  in  readiness  for  the  service"  of  Cornelius. J    This 

*  Mark  iii.  9.  Acts  i.  14,  ii.  42,  40,  vi.  4,  x.  7.  Rom.  xii.  12.  Eph. 
vi.  18.  t  Acts  i.  14,  ii.  42,  4G.  Rom.  xii.  12.  Eph.vi.  18- 

\  The  passage  in  Mark  is  similar  to  this  one.  Christ  directs  a  boat 
to  be  kept  in  readiness  for  him. 


(     59     ) 

was  precisely  the  situation  of  the  apostles.  They  were 
"  stewards  of  the  mysteries  of  the  Gospel.7'  To  dispense 
these,  was  their  business,  their  employment.  Connected  with 
this,  were  the  care  of  the  poor,  and  the  oversight  of  the 
church's  contributions.  For  a  short  time,  the  spiritual  offi- 
cers performed,  unaided,  the  whole  of  their  functions;  until 
the  less  important  had^so  increased,  that  to  have  attended 
to  them  properly,  they  must  have  "left  the  word  of  God  to 
serve  tables."  To  relieve  themselves  from  the  burden 
which  rested  upon  them,  they  direct  the  people  to  choose 
certain  persons,  whom  they  would  appoint  over  this  busi- 
ness, so  that  they  might  have  the  opportunity  of  devoting 
their  labours  "to  prayer  and  to  the  ministry  of  the  word." 
There  is  no  intimation,  throughout  the  whole  narrative, 
that  the  business  was  improper  for  them,  but  merely  that 
0  it  was  not  reason  that  they  should  leave  the  word  of  God, 
and  serve  tables." 

The  deacons  were,  therefore,  appointed  not  as  inde- 
pendent officers,  but  as  "helps,"  or  assistants,  to  the  spi- 
ritual officers.  They  are  so  called  in  1  Cor.  xii.  28.* 
That  the  deacon  is  meant  by  this  title,  is  nearly,  if  not 
altogether,  certain.  Ruling-elders  cannot  be  intended : 
for  they  are  the  "  governments  "  mentioned  just  after. 
The  pastor  cannot  be  the  "  helper;"  for  his  is  the  highest 
office  in  the  church.  The  "helps"  must  then  be  the 
"deacons."  This  interpretation  is  strongly  confirmed  by 
the  narrative  in  Acts  vi.  of  their  original  institution;  for 
in  that  passage  they  evidently  appear  as  "helps." 

Presbyterians  have  always  taken  the  same  view  of  this 
subject,  when  they  say,  as  they  often  do,  that  the 
higher  offices  include  the  inferior;  the  pastoral  inclu- 
ding the  eldership  —  the  latter,  the  deaconship.  This 
Presbyterian  doctrine  is  clearly  and  beautifully  stated  by 
the  London  Divines. f  "For  who,"  say  they,  "is  so  little 
versed  in  the  Scriptures,  but  that  he  knows  that  apostles, 
pastors,  elders,  and  deacons,  are  distinct  officers  one  from 
another;  yet  all  the  inferior  offices  are  virtually  compre- 
hended in  the  superior,  and  may  be  discharged  by  them ; 
elders  may  distribute  as  well  as  deacons,  and  beyond  them 
rule;  pastors  may  distribute  and  rule  as  well  as  deacons 
and  elders,  and  beyond  both,  preach,  dispense  sacraments 
and  ordain  ministers."  And  by  Dr.  M'Leod,|  who  says, 
"the  ruling  elders  are  their  (the  teaching  elders')  helps; 

*  For  the  views  of  many  commentators  on  this  text,  see  page  6, 
foot-note.  t  Divine  Right,  &c,  p.  112. 

X  See  Ecclesiastical  Catechism,  page  47. 


(     60     ) 

and  the  deacons  the  helps  of  both."  Dickson,  on  this 
word  "helps,"  says,  "the  deacons  not  a  little  aided  by 
their  ministrations,"*  &c.  "Aided"  whom?  The  elders, 
unquestionably.  If  the  deacons  are  the  "helps"  of  the 
ruling  and  teaching  elders,  then  are  they  not  independent 
of  them  in  the  discharge  of  any  part  of  their  functions. 

If  we  cast  our  eye  over  the  Old  Testament  dispensation, 
we  find  the  same  principle  pervading  it  likewise.  From 
the  time  of  the  giving  of  the  law  in  the  wilderness,  until 

O  P  ' 

the  canon  of  the  Old  Testament  revelation  was  completed, 
the  Levites,  who  were  generally  the  actual  administrators, 
of  the  ecclesiastical  revenues,  always  performed  their  offi- 
cial duties  in  co-operation  with  the  superior  functionaries^ 
They  were  never  independent.  Nor  were  the  deacons  of 
the  synagogue.  We  are  informed  by  Prideaux,  that  the 
"  chazanim,  or  deacons  of  the  synagogue,  had,  under  the 
rulers,  the  charge  and  oversight. "J  Brown  of  Hadding- 
ton, says  that  "these  two,  (the  chazanim),  with  the  other 
rulers,  form  a  council. "§>  Indeed,  it  is  unquestioned,  that 
the  deacons  of  the  synagogue  were  not  independent,  but 
subordinate  officers. 

These  investigations  show  us  that  the  apostles,  to  whom 
at  first  the  management  of  all  the  ecclesiastical  affairs 
was  committed,  still  retained,  after  the  ordination  of  a 
distinct  order  of  officers  to  take  charge  of  a  specified  por- 
tion of  them,  a  general  supervision.  And  it  also  appears, 
that  this  was  in  accordance  with  a  principle  which  ran 
through  the  divinely  organized  ecclesiastical  constitution 
of  the  Christian  church  under  the  Old  Testament  dispen- 
sation. 

II.   This  principle  has  been  always  acted  upon  by  the  Chris- 
tian Church,  in  her  purest  times. 

On  this  branch  of  our  investigations,  it  is  not  necessary 
to  do  more  in  reference  to  the  doctrines  and  usages  of  the 
primitive  church,  than  merely  refer  to  them.  That  the 
deacon  was  not  an  independent  officer  in  the  church  in 
the  early  periods  of  the  present  dispensation,  is  so  well 
known  that  any  detailed  proof  upon  the  subject  would  be 

*  See  page  35. 

t  Num.  viii.  19.  2  Chron.  xxiv.  5,  11.  Neh.  x.  37,  38,  xiii.  13.  Our 
space  does  not  admit  of  pursuing  farther  this  part  of  the  investigation. 
The  reader  is  referred  to  the  list  of  passages  relating  to  this  subject  in 
Note  15. 

J  Pricleaux's  Connexions,  Part  I.,  Book  vi. 

§  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  on  the  word  "  Synagogue.1' 


(     61     ) 

superfluous.  Therefore,  passing  the  primitive  times,  let 
us  descend  to  the  age  of  that  great  reformation,  to  which 
the  reader  has  been  so  frequently  directed.  In  none  ot 
the  reformed  churches  was  the  deacon  considered  to  be 
independent  in  the  exercise  of  his  office.  Indeed,  as  we 
shall  soon  see,  in  most  of  them  there  were  formed  consis- 
tories composed  of  the  pastor,  ruling  elders,  and  deacons, 
of  particular  congregations.  The  Book  of  Common  Or- 
der used  by  the  Scottish  congregation  in  the  city  of  Ge- 
neva, and  which  is  substantially  the  same  with  that  of 
the  other  congregations  of  Geneva,  thus  speaks  of  the  ex- 
ercise of  the  deacon's  office.  /'  The  deacons  must  be  men 
of  good  estimation,"  &c.  Their  office  is  to  gather  the 
alms  diligently,  and  faithfully  to  distribute  it  with  the  con- 
sent of  the  ministers  and  elders"*  The  principles  of  the 
Reformed  church  in  France  are  very  strongly  and  point- 
edly expressed.  In  her  Discipline,  Sec.  xii.  Chap.  III. 
Canon  II.  it  is  said:  " The  elder's  office  is,  together  with 
the  pastors,  to  oversee  the  church,  &c.  In  general,  it  is  to 
have  the  same  care  with  them  in  all  concerns  about  the 
order,  maintenance,  and  government  of  the  church."  And 
Canon  IV:  "The  deacon's  office  is  to  collect,  and  distri- 
bute, by  the  advice  of  the  consistory,  moneys  to  the  poor, 
&c."  And  in  Chapter  I.  Canon  XXL  noblemen  were 
"everyone  of  them  desired  to  constitute,  in  their  families, 
a  consistory,  composed  of  the  minister,  and  of  the  best 
approved  persons  for  godliness  in  their  said  families,  who 
shall  be  chosen  elders  and  deacons  P\ 

*  Dunlop's  Confessions,  Edinburg,  1722,  page  383.  The  reader  will 
have  no  difficulty  in  understanding,  after  the  explanations  that  have  been 
given  in  this  Essay,  that  by  "alms,"  is  not  meant  what  we  call  "poor's 
money."  It  will  be  remembered  that  Calvin  uses,  as  synonymous  terms, 
"alms,"  and  "treasures  of  the  church,"  and  "church  goods,"  meaning 
as  he  himself  explains  them,  "the  goods  dispensed  to  the  ministry, 
schools,  &c."     See  pages  32  and  38. 

t  The  word  "  consistory"  which  occurs  so  frequently  in  the  old 
books  of  ecclesiastical  policy,  requires  explanation.  It  is  not  found  in 
the  Scriptures.  Neither  is  "session,"  "  synod,"  or  "  general  assembly." 
It  is  the  old  appellation  in  the  Reformed  Churches  for  all  their  church 
courts.  Stewart's  Collections,  Book  I.  Title  xv.  §  35,  "All  church  judi- 
catories, but  especially  this,  (the  session,)  were  called  consistories,  where 
the  judges  did  stand  in  administering  justice."  The  word  "  consistory" 
is  compounded  of  two  Latin  words,  "con"  and  "sisto,"  and  signifies  to 
stand  together.  "  Session,"  is  from  the  Latin  "  sessio,"  a  sitting.  "  Sy- 
nod" from  the  Greek  "au^oSo?" — meeting,  or  going  together.  This 
name  was  more  common  among  the  Reformers  on  the  Continent,  than 
in  Scotland  or  England.  Yet  it  was  not  at  all  unusual  there,  as  Stewart 
truly  says  in  the  above   quotation.     Stevenson*  enumerates,  among  the 

*  Hist.  vol.  i.  p.  164,  on  the  year  1637.     The  reader  should  know,  indeed,  it  ia 


(     62     ) 

The  Holland  churches  were  constituted  in  the  same 
manner.  They  had  "  consistories  (or  assemblies  com- 
posed of  ministers,  elders,  and  deacons)  for  overseeing 
church  affairs.'7* 

The  Scottish  congregation  that  was  formed  in  Rotter- 
dam by  exiles  from  Scotland,  during  the  persecution 
which  followed  the  restoration  of  Charles  II.,  not  only 
had  deacons,  but  these  deacons  sat  in  consistory  with  the 
minister  and  elders  :  for  we  find  the  following  minute  in- 
serted in  the  register  of  their  "consistory."'  "The  session 
unanimously  concluded  that  there  should  be  five  elders 
besides  Mr.  Wallace,  whom  we  yet  own  as  such  notwith- 
standing what  is  gone  against  him:  and  also  Jive  deacons ."f 

The  Scottish  church,  from  the  rise  of  the  reformation 
until  her  order  was  buried  in  ruins  by  the  tyranny  of  an 

grievances  of  the  Scottish  Church  which  led  to  the  second  Reformation, 
that  «•  consistories,  or  sessions,  were  reckoned  in  the  number  of  conven- 
ticles, andlaick  elders  and  deacons  were  rejected."  This  old  presbyte- 
rian  word  is  now  sometimes  used  as  a  title  by  which  to  designate  a 
"meeting  together  of  all  the  officers  of  the  congregation,"  to  consult 
respecting  its  secular  interests  chiefly;  the  name  "session,"  being  re- 
served exclusively  for  meetings  of  the  teaching  and  ruling  elders  for 
government. 

*  Gerard  Brandt's  History  of  the  Reformation  in  Holland,  vol.i.  p.  314. 

t  John  Brown,  of  Whampray,  the  author  of  the  Apologetical  Narra- 
tion, was  long  the  pastor  ,of  this  congregation.  The  "Mr.  Wallace" 
referred  to,  was  Colonel  Wallace,  the  gallant  leader  of  the  Covenanters 
at  the  Pentland  Hills,  in  1666.  After  that  battle,  he  withdrew  to  Hol- 
land, and  in  1676,  was  chosen  an  elder  of  the  church  in  Rotterdam.  The 
next  year  he  was  ordered  to  remove  from  the  territories  of  Holland,  in 
consequence  of  the  threats  of  England.  This  was  "  what  had  <r0ne 
against  him."  It  appears  from  the  fact  above  mentioned,  that  the  Scot- 
tish congregation  of  Rotterdam,  composed  of  some  of  the  choicest  of 
Scotland's  sufferers,  at  that  time,  for  religion  and  liberty,  was  constituted 
with  "  elders  and  deacons,"  who  sat  together  in  a  body  called  a  consistory. 
This  form,  it  should  be  observed,  was  not  adopted  by  them  after  the 
example  of  the  Holland  churches  ;  they  had  been  accustomed  to  it  in 
the  Scottish  Church.  The  fact  above  stated,  will  be  found  in  the  March 
number  of  1839,  of  the  "  Covenanter." 

The  following  account  of  the  form  of  government  in  the  Waldensian 
churches,  at  the  present  time,  possesses  no  inconsiderable  interest  in 
itself,  and  likewise,  in  connexion  with  this  subject.  The  account  is 
taken  from  the  "Presbyterian"  of  Dec.  12,  1840.  "They  have  their 
Synod,  and  their  representative  pastors,  deacons,  and  elders.  The  pas- 
tors are  elected  by  the  parishes  by  free  and  open  choice ;  and  the  elders 
are  selected  by  their  peers  after  a  rigid  examination.  Out  of  their  num- 
ber, one  is  selected  to  fill  the  office  of  deacon,  in  whom  is  vested  the  alms, 
and  the  properties  of  the  churches.  The  consistory  is  just  a  church  ses- 
sion, consisting  of  the  pastor,  as  chairman,  the  elders,  and  the  deacon, 
and  it  is  vested  with  the  charge  of  the  ecclesiastical  affairs  of  the  parish." 

plain  in  the  extract,  that  the  "  consistory,  or  session,"  in  that  church,  was  "  consti- 
tuted of  elders  and  deacons." 


(     63     ) 

apostate  king  and  parliament,  held  without  any  wavering, 
the  same  doctrines  substantially  on  this  subject,  with  the 
Genevan,  French,  and  Holland  reformers.  First  Book  of 
Discipline,  Chap.  VII.  "  The  office  of  deacon  is  to  gather 
and  distribute  the  alms  of  the  poor,  according  to  the  direc- 
tion of  the  session."  We  discover,  by  comparing  this  pa- 
ragraph with  Chap.  XVII. ,  that  they  did  not  limit  the 
duties  of  the  deacon  to  the  care  of  the  poor,  but  extended 
it  to  "the  taking  up  of  all  the  rents  of  the  kirk,  and  dis- 
poning them  to  the  poor,  the  ministry,  &c."  And  by  com- 
paring it  with  Chap.  VIII.  §  9;  that  "the  ministers,  el- 
ders, and  deacons,  were  to  consult  together,"  in  disposing  of 
the  fiscal  matters.  In  the  Second  Book  of  Discipline,  Chap. 
VII.,  they  say  that  "  it  pertains  to  the  eldership,  to  take 
heed  that  the  word  of  God  be  purely  preached,  &c. — and 
the  ecclesiastical  goods  uncorruptly  distributed."  They 
did  not,  of  course,  believe  the  deacon  by  whom  these 
goods  are  distributed,  to  be  an  independent  officer,  or  an 
officer  accountable  only  to  the  people. 

During  the  second  reformation  this  church  continued  to 
hold  the  same  principles.  We  find  the  Second  Book  of 
Discipline  revived  and  ratified,  and  still  held  as  law  in 
that  church,  throughout  this  period  of  her  prosperity  and 
independence.  In  the  year  1645,  the  general  assembly 
issued,  in  overture,  one  hundred  and  eleven  propositions  on 
church  government  and  order.  The  fifty-fourth  mentions 
as  one  of  the  "things  wherein  the  ecclesiastical  power  is  to 
be  exercised,  the  treasury  of  the  church  and  collections  of 
the  faithful."  There  is  no  evidence  that  this  part  of  these 
propositions  was  ever  objected  to.  The  same  principles 
pervaded  her  ecclesiastical  legislation.  The  law  of  1648 
respecting  meetings  of  session  has  the  following  clause. 
"  The  deacons  are  always  present,  not  for  discipline,  but 
for  what  relates  to  their  own  office."*  In  Stewart's  Collec- 
tions, Book  I.  Tit.  viii.,  after  some  general  statements  re- 
specting the  duty  of  the  deacons  to  examine  the  state  of 
the  poor,  and  collect  funds  for  their  supply,  it  is  added, 
"  that  the  money  so  received  be  faithfully  delivered  up  to 
the  session,  according  to  ivhose  judgment  and  appointment, 
the  deacons  are  to  distribute  the  church  goods.  In  which 
matters  they  have  a  decisive  vote  with  the  elders;  but  in 
other  cases  their  opinion  is  only  consultative,  and  they 
may  always  be  present."     This  imbodies  the  whole  doc- 

*  It  has  been  shown  in  the  second  chapter  of  this  Essay,  that  the 
Church  of  Scotland  considered  the  distribution  of  all  the  ordinary  reve- 
nues to  belong  "  to  the  office  "  of  the  deacon. 


(     64     ) 

trine  of  the  exercise  of  the  deacon's  office.  He  is  to  dis- 
tribute the  "  church  goods,"  and  to  have  a  special  concern 
for  the  poor.  The  pastor,  elders,  and  deacons,  were  to 
meet  and  act  together ;  in  making  distribution,  all  having 
a  "decisive  vote;"  while  in  regard  to  discipline,  the  pastor 
and  elders  alone  voted.  There  is  nothing  here  like  official 
independence  ascribed  to  the  deacon. 

The  form  of  church  government  adopted  in  the  year 
1645,  as  a  part  of  the  covenanted  uniformity  with  Eng- 
land and  Ireland,  states  the  same  doctrine.  After  enu- 
merating the  three  orders  of  officers,  a  pastor,  ruling  elders, 
and  deacons,  as  belonging  to  a  particular  congregation, 
this  document  goes  on  to  say,  "  These  officers  are  to  meet 
too-ether  at  convenient  and  set  times  for  the  well  ordering 
of  the  affairs  of  that  congregation,  each  according  to  his 
office."*  The  pastors,  elders,  and  deacons  are  to  "  meet 
together:"  so  far  all  is  plain.  It  would  be  the  merest 
quibbling  to  say,  that  the  pastor  and  elders  are  to  "meet 
together"  but  that  the  deacons  are  to  meet  by  themselves; 
for  then  we  must  explain  the  whole  paragraph  accord- 
ingly, and  we  would  have  the  pastor  meeting  by  him- 
self"! They  are  to  attend  to  "  the  affairs  of  that  con- 
gregation'" the  whole  affairs,  temporal  and  spiritual;  for 
in  this  manner  unlimited  expressions  such  as  this  are  to 
be  explained,  unless  necessarily  limited,  and  here  no 
such  necessity  exists.  Besides,  what  is  commonly  under- 
stood by  "the  affairs"  of  a  congregation?  Certainly,  its 
whole  interests — its  pecuniary  affairs,  as  well  as  the  af- 
fairs of  the  poor,  and  the  spiritual  affairs.  None  need  to  be 
told  that  the  first  of  these — the  pecuniary — are  not  only 
"■  affairs,"  but  often  very  important  ones.  They  are  to 
transact  these  affairs  "each  according  to  his  office"  To 
arrive  at  the  genuine  sense  of  this  clause,  the  reader  has 
only  to  remember  the  laws  of  the  church  quoted  above. 
The  pastor,  elders,  and  deacons,  in  the  Scottish  church 
met  together.  Discipline  was  managed  by  the  pastor  and 
elders  alone — the  other  affairs  by  the  joint  action  of  all. 

This  cursory  view  of  the  exercise  of  the  deacon's  office 
in  the  church  of  Scotland,  satisfactorily  establishes  the 
fact,  that  this,  the  purest  of  all  the  reformed  churches,  al- 
ways considered  the  deacon  an  officer  under  authority, 
who  was  to  be  associated  with  the  eldership  in  the  dis- 
charge of  his  official  functions.  The  most  intelligent  of 
the  English  divines  agreed  with  the  Scottish  church  in 

*  Confession  of  Faith.  Philadelphia  Edition,  1838,  p.  574- 


(     65     ) 

this  principle,  as  appears  from  that  part  of  the  form  of 
church  government  compiled  by  the  Westminster  divines, 
to  which  reference  has  just  been  made.  The  London  di- 
vines frequently  express  similar  sentiments  in  their  valu- 
able essay  from  which  we  have  already  quoted  so  often. 
They  say,  "  how  it  (the  alms)  shall  be  best  improved,  and 
disposed  of,  cannot  be  denied  to  be  an  act  of  government, 
and  for  this  did  the  elders  meet  together,  Acts  xi.  30." 
Again:  "The  deacons  being  specially  to  be  intrusted  with 
the  church's  goods,  and  the  disposal  thereof,  according  to 
the  direction  of  the  presbijtery,  for  the  good  of  the  church." 
Again:  "The  apostles,  in  the  constitution  of  elders  in  every 
church,  derogated  nothing  from  their  own  authority,  nor 
discharged  themselves  of  their  care.  So,  when  they  ap- 
pointed deacons  to  take  care  of  supplies  for  the  poor,  they 
did  not  forego  their  own  right,  nor  the  exercise  of  their  duty 
as  their  other  work  would  permit  them.  Gal.  ii.  9,  10."* 

John  Owen|  says;  "yet  did  not  the  apostles  herein  ut- 
terly forego  the  care  of  providing  for  the  poor,  which 
being  originally  committed  unto  them  by  Jesus  Christ, 
they  would  not  wholly  divest  themselves  of  it.  But  by  the 
direction  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  they  provided  such  assistance 
in  the  work,  as  that  for  the  future  it  might  require  no 
more  of  their  time  and  pains,  but  what  they  should  spare 
from  their  principal  employment.  And  the  same  care  is 
still  incumbent  on  the  ordinary  pastors  and  elders  of  the 
churches,  so  far  as  the  execution  of  it.  doth  not  interfere 
with  their  principal  work  and  duty,  from  which  those 
who  understand  it  aright,  can  spare  but  little  of  their  time 
and  thought."  Again:  "But  whereas  there  are  three 
things  that  concur  and  are  required  to  the  ministration 
unto  the  poor  members  of  the  church;  (1.)  The  love, 
charity,  bounty,  and  benevolence  of  the  members  of  the 
church  in  contributions  unto  that  ministration;  (2.)  The 
care  and  oversight  of  the  discharge  of  it;  (3.)  The  actual 
exercise  and  application  of  it:  the  last  only  belongs  unto 
the  office  of  deacons,  J  and  neither  of  the  first  is  discharged 
by  the  institution  of  it.  The  care  also  of  the  whole 
work  is,  as  was  said,  still  incumbent  on  the  pastors  and 
elders  of  the  church,  only  the  ordinary  execution  is  com- 
mitted to  the  deacons." 

This  distinguished  divine  then  defines  more  particu- 

*  Divine  Right,  &c,  p.  184,  248.  The  last  quotation  is  from  Dr. 
Owen's  work  on  "The  Ruling  Elder." 

t  "Treatise  on  Church  Government,"  chap.  ix.  These  extracts  are 
long,  but  they  will  amply  repay  the  trouble  of  perusal. 

X  As  peculiar  to  it,  is  evidently  meant. 


(      66     ) 

larly,  the  extent  and  exercise  of  this  office.  "  Whereas, 
the  reason  of  the  institution  of  this  office  was,  in  general, 
to  free  the  pastors  of  the  church  who  labour  in  word  and 
doctrine  from  avocations  by  outward  things,  such  as  where- 
in the  church  is  concerned :  it  belongs  unto  the  deacons, 
not  only  to  take  care  of  and  provide  for  the  poor,  but  to 
manage  all  other  affairs  of  the  church  of  the  same  kind; 
such  as  are  the  providing  for  the  place  of  the  church- 
assemblies,  of  the  elements  for  the  sacraments,  of  keeping, 
collecting  and  disposing  of  the  stock  of  the  church,  for  the 
maintenance  of  its  officers,  and  incidences,  especially  in 
the  time  of  trouble  and  persecution.  Herein  are  they 
obliged  to  attend  the  elders  on  all  occasions,  to  perform 
the  duty  of  the  church  towards  them,  and  receive  direc- 
tions from  them."  Again,  he  asks:  "What  is  the  duty 
of  the  deacons  towards  the  elders  of  the  churches?"  And 
answers  thus :  "  Whereas  the  care  of  the  whole  church,  in 
all  its  concernments,  is  principally  committed  unto  the  pas- 
tors, teachers,  and  elders,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  deacons  in 
the  discharge  of  their  office — 1.  To  acquaint  them  from 
time  to  time  with  the  state  of  the  church,  and  especially 
of  the  poor,  so  far  as  it  falls  under  their  inspection.  2.  To 
seek  and  take  their  advice  in  matters  of  greater  import- 
ance relating  to  their  office.  3.  To  be  assisting  unto  tJiem 
in  all  the  outward  concerns  of  the  church" 

This  concludes  our  review  of  the  principles  of  the 
churches,  and  of  distinguished  writers,  at  or  near  the 
period  of  the  Reformation,  in  regard  to  the  exercise  of  the 
deacon's  office.  We  find  among  them  a  very  remarkable 
unanimity.  Indeed,  they  entirely  harmonize  in  their  views. 
From  the  latter  part  of  the  seventeenth  century,  it  need 
hardly  be  observed,  darkness  begins  to  settle  down  upon 
us  on  this  subject.  Within  a  short  time,  however,  the 
doctrines  of  the  Reformation  have  been,  by  some,  recog- 
nised and  reiterated.  The  Reformed  Presbyterian  Church 
in  Scotland,  has  expressed  her  views  very  lately  with  suf- 
ficient clearness  in  the  following  language,  already  quoted: 
"Deacons  are  ordained  upon  the  choice  of  the  congrega- 
tion, and  are  associated  with  the  teaching  and  ruling-elders 
in  distributing  to  the  necessities  of  the  poor,  and  managing 
other  temporalities  in  the  church"*  The  Associate  Presby- 
terian Church,  in  the  United  States,  in  her  Book  of  Dis- 
cipline,! Art.  IX.,  refers  to  this  subject  in  the  following 

*  "Testimony,"  edition  1837,  chap.  xi.  §  11.  In  the  following  pa- 
ragraph, it  is  said,  "  Rulers  meet  in  presbytery,  synod,  &c.  Each  of 
these  courts  is  a  consistnri/  of  elders." 

t  Published  in  1817.     In  the  revised  form  of  this  book,  now  in  over- 


(     67     ) 

terms:  " Deacons  are  admitted  to  sit  in  session  when  met  to 
consult  about  the  secular  affairs  of  the  congregation,  and  to 
give  their  advice,  but  not  to  vote  in  any  judicial  decision, 
except  in  matters  relating  to  their  office"  The  same  prin- 
ciples substantially  are  expressed  by  Dr.  M'Leod.  He 
says  of  the  deacon,*  "his  official  duty  entirely  respects 
temporal  affairs."  And  Question  80,  "  Is  the  sole  right  of 
managing  the  pecuniary  affairs  of  the  congregation  lodged 
in  the  deacon's  hands?"  he  answers  as  follows:  "The 
apostles  were  the  primary  depositories  of  power,  and  after 
them,  teaching  elders  a,re  competent  to  the  management  of 
all  ecclesiastical  concerns;  ruling  elders  are  their  helps;  and 
deacons  are  the  helps  of  both:  the  apostles  and  elders  had 
in  trust  the  collections  for  the  poor."f 

III.  In  our  endeavours  to  establish  the  subordination  of 
the  deacon  to  the  ruling  officers  of  the  church,  or,  in  other 
words,  the  right  of  these  rulers  to  a  general  superintend- 
ence over,  or  virtual  co-operation  with  the  deacon  in  dis- 
charging his  functions,  we  have,  thus  far,  drawn  our  argu- 
ments from  the  highest  sources,  the  Scriptures,  and  the 
footsteps  of  the  flock.  The  doctrines  of  the  Bible  and  of 
the  church,  respecting  the  exercise  of  the  deacon's  office, 
are,  as  we  might  expect,  altogether  wise,  judicious,  and 
safe.  The  least  reflection  will  satisfy  us,  that  to  remove 
entirely  the  management  of  the  fiscal  concerns  of  any 
society  out  of  the  hands  of  those  who  have  the  direction  of 
its  other  affairs,  would  be  unwise  and  unsafe.  Such  an  ar- 
rangement, any  where,  would  probably  terminate  by  clash- 
ing between  these  independent  powers  in  the  same  body. 
For  example,  the  legislature,  in  a  state  so  constituted, 

ture  before  that  body,  this  is  expressed  as  follows,  Art.  II.  §  15:  "The 
deacons  of  a  congregation,  in  conjunction  with  the  session,  shall  form  a 
consistory,  (the  pastor  presiding,)  for  the  management  of  the  temporali- 
ties of  the  congregation;  from  whose  proceedings,  however,  an  appeal 
may  be  taken  to  the  presbytery." 

*  Ecclesiastical  Catechism,  edition  1831,  p.  47. 

t  The  sentiments  of  this  distinguished  divine  were  not  mere  theory. 
He  was  instrumental  in  introducing  deacons,  and  establishing  a  consis- 
tory in  his  congregation,  nearly  a  quarter  of  a  century  ago ;  where  it 
continued  until  his  death.  There  is  an  expression  in  a  note  to  the  Ec- 
clesiastical Catechism,  which  does  not  exhibit  that  correctness  which 
usually  characterizes  Dr.  M'Leod's  views  on  this  subject.  He  says,  (p. 
130,)  "They  (the  deacons)  are  founded  upon  the  circumstance  of  a  class 
of  paupers  belonging  to  the  church." — This  idea  has  in  it  something 
that  is  even  repulsive.  Read  the  narrative,  in  Acts  ii.  and  iv.,  of  the 
remarkable  liberality  of  the  Christian  converts,  and  say — is  this  a  fair 
representation  of  the  matter  ?  If  so,  then  the  apostles  themselves  must 
have  been  paupers — for  they  we're  supported  out  of  these  contributions. 


(     08     j 

might  legislate,  but  in  every  instance  where  an  appropri- 
ation was  requisite  for  carrying  laws  into  effect,  the  will 
of  the  legislature  might  be  thwarted  by  the  fiscal  offi- 
cers, and  rendered  ineffectual.  Often,  unquestionably, 
would  this  occur.  Consequently,  we  find  no  society  so 
constituted.  Nations,  whatever  their  form  of  government, 
and  whatever  their  character  in  other  respects,  never  have 
formed  an  imperium  in  imperio — a  government  of  this  kind 
within  the  government.  No  such  arrangement  is  found 
any  where  in  churches  constituted  upon  Presbyterian 
principles,  except  in  reference  to  the  affairs  of  congrega- 
tions. Churches,  considered  in  their  collective  capacity, 
have  revenues.  These  are  managed  under  the  direction 
of  the  supreme  judicatory.  Synod,  General  Synod,  or  As- 
sembly— and  appropriated  to  the  support  of  theological 
seminaries,  for  missionary  and  education  purposes ;  and, 
in  general,  for  the  accomplishment  of  such  objects  as  are 
of  public  interest  and  obligation.  Sometimes,  these  re- 
venues are  large.  Subordinate,  or  provincial  synods  and 
presbyteries,  have  their  distinct  funds,  which  are  appro- 
priated under  their  control  and  supervision.  Now,  it  may 
be  asked,  and  it  will  be  hard  to  find  an  answer  that  would 
satisfy  a  man  of  sense,  why  a  principle  of  so  universal  ap- 
plication, should  not  apply  to  the  concerns  of  the  church 
in  a  single  congregation  ?  If  the  eldership  of  a  congrega- 
tion have  no  voice  in  secular  affairs  at  home,  how  do  they 
acquire  it  in  those  larger  bounds  which  the  presbyterial 
and  synodical  limits  embrace?  If  it  be  right  that  a  synod 
should  take  the  oversight,  in  fiscal  matters,  of  what  is  sy- 
nodical—and  a  presbytery,  of  what  is  presbyterial — why 
should  not  a  session  of  what  is  congregational  ?  If  there 
is  something  undignified,  or  profane,  in  the  funds  devoted 
to  religious  objects  in  a  congregation,  that  renders  it  inde- 
licate for  the  eldership  to  touch  them,  what  sanctifies  those 
of  a  presbytery  or  synod  employed  in  the  same  way  ?  The 
truth  is,  that,  although  these  revenues  are  in  some  respects 
different,  there  can  be  no  reason  why  they  should  not 
all  be  managed  under  the  general  supervision  and  control 
of  the  eldership. 

It  will  here  be  asked,  and  very  properly,  what  guaran- 
tee will  contributors  have,  that  the  funds  which  they  con- 
tribute will  be  judiciously  and  faithfully  applied  to  the 
objects  contemplated?  Happily,  this  inquiry  can  be  met 
by  more  than  one  satisfactory  reply.  Indeed,  it  may  be 
safely  affirmed,  that  no  other  system  furnishes  as  many, 
or  as  strong  guarantees  for  the  wise  and  faithful  distribu- 
tion of  the  ecclesiastical  goods. 


(  M  ) 

In  the  first  place,  they  will  be  administered  by  men  of 
the  people's  own  choice.  And  if  the  elective  franchise  is 
properly  exercised,  men  will  be  chosen  to  fill  all  the  offices 
connected  in  these  affairs,  possessing  a  measure,  at  least, 
of  the  scriptural  qualifications.  And,  unless  the  state  of 
religion  and  morals  in  a  congregation  be  exceedingly  low, 
they  will  be,  at  least,  honest  men.  And  it  may  be  observed 
that,  after  all,  this  is  the  chief  and  best  guarantee  for  a 
faithful  administration,  either  in  church  or  state.  In  vain 
will  nations  form  "  checks  and  balances,"  if  they  neglect 
the  scriptural  direction,  and  do  not  set  over  them  "  able 
men,  such  as  fear  God,  men  of  truth,  and  hating  covet- 
oasness."*  And  just  so,  in  the  churches.  The  system 
advocated  in  this  Essay,  is  that  which  is  most  likely  to 
furnish  this  best  of  all  guarantees.  Deacons  are  chosen 
-  by  the  people,  and  then,  after  examination,  solemnly 
sworn,  in  their  ordination  vows,  to  discharge  their  official 
duties  conscientiously. 

In  the  second  place,  the  deacons  should  render,  and  may 
be  required  to  render,  a  full  and  certified  account,  at  suit- 
able intervals,  to  the  congregation,  of  all  their  transactions, 
making  as  complete  a  statement  as  circumstances  warranty 
so  that  their  whole  doings  are  known  to  the  church.  If 
any  thing  has  been  done  wrong,  unintentionally,  or  igno- 
rantly,  it  may  thus^  being  pointed  out  in  a  friendly  spirit, 
be  rectified;  while  serious  injustice  or  mal-administration 
may  be  rectified  at  the  stated  presbyterial  visitation, %  or 
even  be  carried  up  through  the  courts  according  to  their 
regular  gradation. 

In  the  third  place,  if  the  deacons  persist  in  neglect  of 
duty,  or  in  mal-administration,  they  may  be  subjected  to 
the  censures  of  the  church.  And  in  case  suspension,  or 
deprivation  of  office,  becomes  necessary,  others  are  chosen 
at  once  to  fill  their  place.  Their  office  is  inseparably  con- 
nected with  their  church-membership;  in  losing  the  pri- 
vileges of  the  latter,  they  lose,  likewise,  the  exercise  of  the 
former.  Thus,  while  the  action  of  the  government  and 
discipline  of  the  church  retains  even  tolerable  purity,  there 
is  this  strong  check  upon  the  deacons,  and  guarantee  for 
the  proper  execution  of  the  trust  committed  to  them. 

*  Ex.  xviii.  21. 

t  Some  expenditures,  it  is  evident,  may  be  of  such  a  character  as  to 
render  a  public  statement  of  them  in  a  promiscuous  assembly,  improper. 
But  even  in  such  cases,  the  deacons  should  go  so  far  as  to  certify  to  the 
faithful  distribution  of  the  church  goods. 

±  Such  visitations  are  essential  to  the  proper  working  of  the  Presby- 
terian system,  even  in  spiritual  things. 


(     70     ) 

In  the  fourth  place,  the  deacons  are  personally  liable  to 
the  church  courts,  and  the  whole  board  are  responsible  to 
the  legal  tribunals. 

These  considerations  sufficiently  establish  the  fact  of 
the  deacon's  responsibility.  Some  would,  perhaps,  desire 
a  more  direct  accountability  to  the  church  assembled  in 
a  congregational  assembly.  And  some,  perhaps,  would 
desire  the  whole  responsibility  to  be  to  the  congregation, 
as  a  check  upon  the  ministry  and  eldership.  To  these  we 
would  say,  that  the  responsibility  we  advocate,  is  not  only 
sufficient,  being  a  responsibility  to  the  church  through 
her  representatives,  but  has  the  additional  advantage  of 
being  entirely  harmonious  with  the  whole  structure  and 
principles  of  Presby terianism ;  while  the  opposite  views 
have  a  strong  leaning  towards  Congregationalism — as  they 
seem  to  intimate  that  Presby  terianism  requires  to  rest 
upon  a  basis  of  Congregationalism,  to  render  it  equable 
and  firm. 

It  is  not  supposed,  indeed,  that  the  system  developed 
in  our  pages,  will,  in  every  instance,  secure  a  faultless  ad- 
ministration. This  would  be,  indeed,  Utopian,  and  fana- 
tical in  the  present  state  of  human  nature.  It  will  not  be 
looked  for.  Nor  is  it  asserted,  that  this  scriptural  system 
will,  in  its  operation,  countervail  the  difficulties  to  which 
the  church  is  subjected,  in  a  state  of  things  where  the 
civil  administration  is  so  often  in  the  hands  of  men,  either 
indifferent  or  directly  opposed  to  the  interests  of  truth.  But, 
assuredly,  so  far  as  any  danger  may  be  apprehended  from 
other  quarters,  where  can  the  property  of  the  church  be 
considered  so  safe  as  under  the  wing-  of  the  church  her- 
self?  Under  what  circumstances  will  it  be  likely  to  be 
so  well  employed  in  the  promotion  of  the  interests  of 
Christ's  kingdom,  as  under  the  supervision  of  the  church 
herself?  And  under  what  management  can  we  look  for 
so  full  an  effusion  of  the  divine  blessing,  as  in  that  which  is 
of  Christ's  appointment?* 

*  The  subordination  of  the  deacon,  we  have  attempted  to  illustrate 
and  establish,  in  the  principle  only.  As  to  the  manner  of  applying  this 
principle,  or  the  precise  mode  of  exercising  the  supervisory  power  be- 
longing to  them,  on  the  part  of  the  eldership,  there  is  something  to  be 
said.  The  old  form  adopted  in  the  Scottish  church,  differed  somewhat, 
though  not  materially,  from  that  in  use  in  the  foreign  reformed  churches. 
In  the  latter,  the  pastor,  elders,  and  deacons  met  in  one  body.  The 
elders  taking  part,  in  all.  that  came  before  them,  the  deacons  advising 
upon  all  matters,  but  voting  only  in  what  concerned  their  own  office. 
In  Scotland,  the  ciders  met,  and  it  appears  that  the  court  was  constituted 
as  a  court  of  elders.  (See  Stewart's  Coll.)  The  deacons  were  always 
present,  and  took  part,  as  in  the  French  churches.     Some  apply  the 


(     71      ) 
CHAPTER   V. 

CONCLUSION. 

Some  observations  respecting-  the  qualifications,  choice* 
and  admission,  or  ordination  of  deacons,  with  the  objects 
and  results  of  their  official  administration  in  detail,  might 
naturally  be  expected  at  this  period  of  our  investigations. 
This  Essay  has,  however,  already  exceeded  the  limits 
originally  prescribed  to  himself  by  the  writer,  and  these 
topics,  though  interesting  and  important,  can  receive  but 
a  mere  passing  notice.  The  deacon  should  be  intelligent, 
godly,  honest,  industrious,  liberal,  zealous,  and  public 
spirited;*  he  is  chosen  by  the  people ;f  the  session  must 
then  proceed  to  examine  the  candidate  of  the  people's 
choice,!  and  having  been  sustained,  he  is  to  be  ordained 
in  the  name  of  the  church's  Head,  and  thus  set  apart  to 
the  deacon's  office.  The  church  so  constituted,  having 
her  ministry,  whose  business  it  is  to  "  preach  the  un- 
searchable riches  of  Christ," — her  elders,  whose  special 
business  it  is  to  rule  in  the  house  of  God,  and  her  dea- 
cons, whose  special  business  it  is  to  attend  to  the  promo- 
tion of  the  welfare  of  the  poor,  and  manage  her  "out- 
ward things,"  is  "furnished  with  all  officers,"^  and  thus 
fully  organized  and  prepared  for  her  work  and  warfare. 
She  is,  then,  in  all  her  parts,  and  in  all  her  operations 
formally,  as  well  as  really,  subject  to  Jesus  Christ  alone,, 
her  blessed  Head. 

principle  a  little  differently.  The  deacons  transact  the  pecuniary  affairs 
of  the  congregation,  and  at  stated  periods  the  whole  transactions  of  the 
board  of  deacons  are  laid  before  a  body  composed  of  all  the  officers  of 
the  congregation,  and  called  a  consistory,  to  distinguish  it  from  the 
meetings  of  the  session.  This  body  examines,  consults,  and  determines 
as  to  what  may  be  deemed  best  in  reference  to  those  matters  which  fall 
under  the  cognizance  of  the  deacons,  until  the  succeeding  meeting.  Ac- 
cording to  this  arrangement,  as  in  the  Scottish  and  other  reformed 
churches,  the  deacon  is  not  a  mere  executive  officer,  he  has  a  voice  in 
the  direction ;  while,  at  the  same  time,  the  other  officers  of  the  congre- 
gation exercise  a  general  supervision,  and  that  in  the  most  unexception- 
able way  in  which  it  appears  possible  to  do  it.  There  is  something 
similar  to  this  in  many  congregations  which  have  not  deacons.  As  in 
most  of  the  congregations,  at  least  of  the  Reformed  Church,  in  Ireland, 
where  the  committees  appointed  to  settle  the  annual  accounts  make  their 
settlements  with  the  session,  and  in  acknowledged  subordination  to  that 
body.  Many  advantages  connected  with  this  system  might  be  pointed 
out,  did  our  limits  allow. 

*  1  Tim.  iii.  8,  9,  12.  t  Acts  vi.  3. 

%  1  Tim.  iii.  10.  §  Larger  Catechism,  Ques.  191. 


(     72     ) 

This  subject  is,  in  many  respects,  an  important  one  :  too 
important  to  be  slightly  treated,  or  carelessly  examined.* 
It  concerns,  intimately,  the  activity  and  efficiency  of  the 
Christian  church  in  the  promotion  of  the  great  ends  of 
her  organization;  the  diffusion  of  the  Gospel  in  its  purity; 
and  the  accomplishment  of  those  works  of  charity  and  bene- 
volence, by  which  she  is  to  reflect  before  the  world,  and 
upon  it,  the  image  of  the  grace  and  compassion  of  her  be- 
neficent Redeemer.  The  church  should  act  with  freedom, 
consistency,  and  power,  in  fulfilling  her  high  and  exalted 
mission.  Why  entangle  her  with  bonds  which  bind  her 
to  the  world?  Why  impair  her  energies  by  the  crippling 
influence  of  humanly  devised  modes  of  managing  her  pe- 
cuniary interests,  when  we  have  in  the  institutions  of 
Christ  a  wise,  consistent,  and  efficient  system?  A  system 
that  falls  in,  in  every  part,  with  the  orderly,  compact,  and 
vigorous  structure  of  Presbyterian  church-government. 
It  was,  moreover,  the  system  received  and  practised  by 
the  reformers  of  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries. 
Let  the  churches  return  to  this  "good  old  way,"  laying- 
aside  all  the  substitutes  that  have  been  devised  for  the 
office  of  deacon,  and  then  one  obstacle  to  the  spread  of 
truth  will  be  removed.  Not,  indeed,  the  only  one.  Far 
from  it.  Yet  accomplish  this,  and  it  is  something  gained 
—  some  progress  made  in  a  better  conformity  to  the  doc- 
trines and  precepts  of  the  Bible.  May  that  time  soon 
come  when  all  "shall  see  eye  to  eye;"  when  every  cor- 
ruption shall  be  purged  out,  and  the  church  redeemed  by 
the  blood  of  Christ,  be  made  altogether  glorious,  "  with 
His  comeliness  put  upon  her." 

*  It  should  be  remembered  that  this  subject  was  considered  important 
enough  by  Knox  and  Melville,  and  other  noble  reformers,  in  Scotland, 
to  be  contended  for,  for  more  than  thirty  years,  (from  15G0  to  1592,) 
against  the  power  of  the  court  of  that  kingdom.  Especially  was  it  zx- 
gued  vehemently  from  1578  to  1592,  fourteen  years. 


A  P  P  E  N  D  r  X 


note  A. — p.  17. 

The  discontinuance  of  the  office  of  the  deacon  in  the  Scottish  churches,  and 
those  which  have  derived  their  system  of  doctrine  and  order  from  them,  is  a 
subject  of  inquiry  which  possesses  both  an  historical  and  a  practical  interest  at 
the  present  time.  The  Act  Recissory,  in  1661,  broke  down  at  once  most  of 
the  fabric  which  had  been  erected  during  the  Second  Reformation.  It  left, 
however,  the  congregations  in  possession  of  their  organization,  until  further 
acts  of  legislation,  and  deeds  of  violence,  destroyed  in  many  districts,  even 
this  part  of  the  Presbyterian  structure.  This  was  particularly  the  case  among 
those  who  faithfully  resisted  seduction,  as  well  as  violence;  and  refusing 
to  accept  of  any  indulgence,  were  driven  into  the  mountains  and  caves, 
by  the  dragoons  of  Dalziel  and  Claverhouse.  After  the  Revolution  settlement, 
in  1688,  when  William  and  Mary  were  called  to  the  throne,  and  Presbyterian- 
ism  re-established,  (but  not  upon  pure  scriptural  principles,)  deacons  existed 
for  a  short  time  in  the  Scottish  Establishment.  It  appears,  that  this  office  had 
been,  at  least  partially,  neglected  before  the  year  1719;  for  in  that  year  an 
act  of  assembly  required  "ministers  to  take  care  that  deacons,  as  well  as  elders, 
be  ordained  in  congregations  where  deacons  are  wanted."  This  law  was  in- 
effectual. The  causes  which  had  led  to  the  previous  neglect,  still  continued 
to  operate ;  and  that,  too  powerfully  for  legislative  enactments  to  counter- 
act. Not  very  long  after  that  period,  deacons  were  not  generally  found  in 
the  congregations  of  that  establishment.  This  accounts  for  the  want  of  this 
class  of  officers  in  those  denominations  which  derive  their  origin  from  that 
church,  since  the  period  when  she  ceased  to  have  deacons. 

As  to  the  causes  of  this.  The  chief  was,  unquestionably,  the  transferring 
to  other  hands  the  deacon's  duties.  The  charge  of  providing  and  erecting 
places  of  worship  ;  of  furnishing  funds  to  the  ministry  of  the  church  for  their 
support,  and,  in  some  measure,  of  providing  for  the  poor,  was  given  into  the 
hands  of  civil  officers.  It  was  in  vain  to  expect  the  office  of  deacon  to  be 
kept  in  the  church  by  laws,  when  the  duties  of  the  office  were  almost  entirely 
discharged  by  civil  officers.  The  few  that  remained  to  the  deacon'  were  after- 
wards quietly  appropriated  by  the  session  ;  and  then  the  deacon,  as  a  necessary 
consequence,  dropped  out  of  the  church's  organization. 

As  to  the  Covenanters,  who  dissented  from  the  Revolution  Settlement,  it  is 
not  difficult  to  ascertain  why  this  office  should  have  disappeared  from  among 
them  also.  While  the  persecution  raged,  it  was  impossible  to  preserve  their 
perfect  organization.  Whether  the  deacons,  which  James  Renwick  in  a  letter 
to  Sir  Robert  Hamilton,  says  he  "  was  about  to  ordain,"  were  evei"  actually 
ordained,  or  not,  is  uncertain.  His  speedy  martyrdom  probably  prevented  it. 
After  the  year  1688,  their  "Societies  "  were  left  eighteen  years  without  a  mi- 
nister. Of  course,  no  ordinations  took  place  during  that  period  among  them, 
either  of  elders,  or  of  deacons.  They  were,  literally,  "  like  sheep  without 
a  shepherd."  This  was  their  state  for  many  years  after  the  constitution 
of  a  presbytery.  They  could  scarcely  be  said  to  have  congregations; 
they  were  rather  missionary  stations,  dispersed  here  and  there.  A  full  and 
regular  organization  could  hardly  be  looked  for.  Moreover,  it  ought  to  be 
remembered,  that  before  the  period  when  their  congregations  had  become 
compacted,  the  churches  around  them  had  dropped  the  deacon's  office.  There 
was,  consequently,  nothing  in  their  circumstances,  to  recall  this  office.  Other 
plans  had  gradually  grown  up  for  the  accomplishment  of  the  objects  contem- 
plated in  its  institution.  It  is  a  ground  of  rejoicing  that  the  Scottish  churches 
are,  generally,  awaking  to  the  consideration  of  this  subject. 

The  observations  just  made,  apply  with  equal  truth  to  the  same  denomina- 


(     74     ) 

tion  in  Ireland.  It  is  not  more  than  one  generation  since  most  of  the  congre- 
gations of  the  Reformed  Presbyterian  Church  there,  have  passed  from  the  con- 
dition  of  missionary  stations.  While  a  church  exists  in  so  scattered  a  state,  the 
want  of  deacons  is  not  sensibly  felt,  and  passes  unobserved. 

note  B. — p.  28. 

The  following  list  of  texts  in  the  Old  Testament,  which  relate  to  the  eccle- 
siastical finances,  has  been  prepared  with  some  care.  Passages  referring  to 
private  pecuniary  concerns,  are  not  given.  The  list  contains,  it  is  believed, 
all  the  texts  in  which  mention  is  made  of  any  arrangement  respecting  the  pub- 
lic fund  of  the  church. 

Lev.  v.,  trespass  money  to  be  given  to  Aaron  and  his  sons. 
Lev.  xxvii.,  laws  regarding  dedicated  things. 

Num.  iii.46 — 51,  directs  the  redemption-money  of  the  first-born  to  be  given 

to  Aaron  and  his  sons. 

"     iv.  chapter  throughout,  directs  the  distribution  of  the  "  charge  of  the 

tabernacle,"  among  the  families  of  Kohath,  Gershon,  and  Merari. 

"    xviii.,  the  provision  made  for  the  maintenance  of  the  priests  and  Le- 

vites,  was  all  to  be  "  devoted,"  and  under  their  charge. 
"    xxxi.  26 — 54,  a  prescribed  portion  of  the  spoils  of  the  Midianites  to  be 
brought  to  "  Eleazar  the  priest,"  v.  29,  31,  41,  51,  54,  and  given 
to  "  the  Levites,"  ver.  30,  47. 
2  Kings  xii.,  the  priests  were  ordered  by  Jehoash  to  repair  the  temple.    They 
were  negligent,  and  the  king  and  Jehoiada  took  the  matter  into 
their  own  hands.     An  extraordinary  case. 
"    xxii.  4 — 7,  the  high-priest  to  take  charge  of  the  funds  to  repair  the 
temple,  in  Josiah's  reign. 

1  Chron.  ix.  26,  certain  Levites  were  over  the  "treasuries  of  the  house  of 

God." 

"  xxiii.  28— 32,  the  whole  charge  of  "the  tabernacle— of  the  holy  things— 
of  Aaron  and  his  sons,"  assigned  to  the  Levites. 

"  xxvi.  25 — 28,  Levites  had  "  charge  over  all  the  treasures  of  the  dedi- 
cated things." 

"  xxix.  8,  all  the  treasures  devoted  to  the  building  of  the  temple,  put  into 
"the  treasure  of  the  house  of  the  Lord,  by  the  hand  of  Jehiel  the 
Gershonite." 

2  Chron.  viii.  15,  the  same  order  was  observed  during  Solomon's  reign,  con- 

cerning the  treasures. 
"     xxiy.  5 — 14,  the  repair  of  the  temple,  as  in  2  Kings  xii. 
"    xxxi.  11 — 19,  the  treasures  of  the  dedicated  things  were  put  into  the 
hands  of  the  Levites,  v.  14,  "to  distribute  the  oblations  of  the 
Lord,  and  the  most  holy  things;"  v.  15,  "to  give  to  their  brethren 
by  courses,  as  well  to  the  great  as  to  the  small ;"  v.  19,  "  to  give 
portions  to  all  the  males  among  the  priests,  and  to  all  that  were 
reckoned  by  genealogies  among  the  Levites."     The  latter  were 
"The  sons  of  Aaron  the  priest." 
"     xxx iv.  10—19,  the  same  as  2  Kings  xxii. 
Neh.  x.  37 — 39,  and  xiii.  13,  tithes,  &c,  given  to  the  Levites.    The  "  priest 
was  to  bo  with  the  Levites,  when  the  Levites  took  tithes." 
"     xii.  44,  47,  the  holy  things  given  to  the  Levites,  who  gave  them  to  the 
sons  of  Aaron. 
These  are  the  principal  texts,  if  not  all,  from  which  we  can  gather  any  in- 
formation concerning  the  fiscal  administration  of  the  Old  Testament  church. 
One  principle  pervades  the  whole.     The  properly  dedicated  to  ecclesiastical 
purposes,  was  always  committed  for  safe  keeping  and  distribution,  to  the 
Levites,  or  priests;  all  of  whom  were  ordained  officers. 

Besides,  there  was  a  distinct  state-treasury,  under  civil  control.    1  Chron. 
xxvii.  24 — 31. 

note  C. — p.  54. 

The  question  respecting  the  title  to  church  property;  that  is,  in  whom  it 
should  vest,  is  connected  with  the  subject,  of  our  investigations  :  and  deserves 


(     75     ) 

some  notice.  There  is  great  diversity  of  practice  on  this  subject  among  the 
churches.  Some  have  incorporated  boards  of  trustees,  others,  incorporated 
consistories  ;  some,  unincorporated  boards  of  trustees,  or  deacons ;  some  vest 
their  property  in  private  individuals,  in  trust.  This  diversity  of  practice 
shows  the  entire  want  of  fixed  principles,  in  regard  to  this  whole  subject  in  the 
churches.  An  inquiry  of  this  kind  could  not  arise  in  a  nation  truly  reformed, 
and  doing  its  duty  in  reference  to  the  church.  At  present,  there  can  be  very 
satisfactory  reasons  given  why  the  title  should  be  vested  in  the  officers  of  the 
congregation : 

1.  They  are  its  natural  representatives.  2.  They  and  their  successors  will 
remain  while  there  is  an  organized  congregation.  3.  In  their  hands  it  is  less 
likely  to  be  used  in  any  way  injurious  to  the  congregation.  These  considera- 
tions show  both  the  equity  and  propriety  of  the  title  so  vesting.  However  held, 
it  is  of  course  understood,  that  the  whole  is  a  trust  in  law,  and  cannot,  with- 
out moral  and  legal  guilt,  be  perverted  from  the  ends  for  which  it  was  con- 
tributed. 


ERRATUM. 

Page  28,  foot-note  "f,"  before  "chap,  xxvi.,"  insert  "  1  Chron." 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  I. 

The  Deacon  a  Standing  Church  Officer. 

Argument  from  the  Scriptures,                 ...  5 

Deacons  in  the  early  Christian  Church,            .                  .  .9 
Opinions  on  the  subject,           .                  .                  .                  .10 

Deacons  in  the  Reformed  churches,                   .                  .  .13 

Expressions  of  opinion,  since  the  Reformation,       .                 .  19 

CHAPTER  II. 

The  Nature  of  the  Deacon's  Office. 

The  care  of  the  Poor  belongs  to  the  Deacon,                 .  .     22 

The  management  of  the  Finances  generally,            .                  .  24 

Argument  from  Acts  vi.  1 — 6,          .                  .                  .  .24 

Views  of  commentators  on  this  passage,                  .                  .  26 

Argument  from  the  Old  Testament,                   .                  .  .28 

Argument  from  the  Jewish  Synagogue,                    .                  .  30 

Doctrines  and  practice  of  the  Church  in  the  primitive  times,  .     31 
Doctrines  and  practice  of  the  Church  in  the  times  of  the  Reformation,    31 

Opinions  of  late  writers,                    .                  .                  .  .36 

Doctrines  of  Presbyterian  churches,         ...  37 

Objections  considered,     .                  .                 .                 .  .38 

CHAPTER  III. 

Of  the  Substitutes  for  the  Deacon. 

Various  substitutes  specified,                    ...  40 

Boards  of  trustees  are  an  innovation,                 .                  .  .42 

Boards  of  trustees  are  unscriptural,         ...  44 

Boards  of  trustees  are  anti-scriptural,                 .                  .  .46 

Boards  of  trustees  are  of  dangerous  tendency,         .                 .  49 

Boards  of  trustees  are  unsafe,           .                 .                 .  .53 

CHAPTER  IV. 

The  Relations  of  the  Deacon. 

THE    DEACON    IS   SUBORDINATE    TO    THE    ECCLESIASTICAL    COURTS. 

Scripture  argument,                .                  ...  55 

The  practice  of  the  Christian  Church,             .               .  .60 

Illustration  of  this  subject  from  the  structure  of  society,          .  67 

This  mode  of  managing  church  property  is  safe,            .  .     68 

CHAPTER  V. 

Conclusion,    .                 .                                 •                 •  .71 
Appendix,               .•#••:.   '$ 


1 


f 


I 


^ATE  DUf=" 


#.  m 


vc:  fe,w, 


fWw 


,'*"  'V*'**^* 


